Iran's chief negotiator Qalibaf has publicly alleged that the United States is failing to uphold its commitments under the ceasefire agreement, citing two key developments as evidence of non-compliance. The statement marks a notable escalation in rhetoric from the Iranian side and underscores deepening tensions in the ongoing diplomatic process.

Qalibaf's Allegations Against the United States

Qalibaf specifically pointed to a U.S. naval blockade as a direct indicator that Washington is not adhering to the terms of the ceasefire agreement. According to his claims, the presence and operation of this naval blockade runs contrary to what was agreed upon under the ceasefire framework, raising serious questions about the implementation of the deal.

Israel's Actions in Lebanon Cited as Further Evidence

In addition to the naval blockade, Qalibaf also referenced Israel's actions in Lebanon as further proof that the U.S. is not following through on ceasefire commitments. By linking Israel's conduct in Lebanon to U.S. responsibility, the Iranian negotiator appeared to hold Washington accountable for the actions of its ally in the region.

Key Claims at a Glance

The following table summarizes the core allegations made by Qalibaf:

Implications for the Ceasefire Framework

Qalibaf's statements reflect a broader pattern of disagreement over the interpretation and execution of the ceasefire agreement. By publicly naming both a naval blockade and regional military activity as violations, the Iranian negotiating position appears to challenge the credibility of the current ceasefire arrangement. The allegations, if unaddressed, could further complicate diplomatic efforts aimed at maintaining the terms of the agreement.

The United States and Iran have moved closer to a formal agreement, with Trump stating that Iran is eager to reach a deal that would benefit the US and its allies. This marks a significant breakthrough following weeks of negotiations mediated through multiple channels, including Pakistan and Qatar. The development comes after Iran's Fars News Agency had earlier reported that the unfreezing of Iran's funds remained the final key issue under active Qatari mediation, a hurdle that appears to have since been addressed. Earlier reports from Axios and Al Jazeera had indicated that the two nations were approaching the signing of a 60-day ceasefire extension and that Qatari mediation had helped secure an agreement on Tehran's frozen assets.

Reported Deal Terms

According to Al Jazeera and Axios, the deal under discussion encompasses a broad set of concessions and arrangements from both sides, covering financial, military, and nuclear dimensions of the long-standing dispute. The following table summarises the key elements of the reported agreement:

Diplomatic Process and Background

According to Iran's Islamic Students' News Agency (ISNA), message exchanges between the two sides were structured around building a broader framework and confidence-building measures, signalling an organised approach to the diplomatic dialogue. A senior Iranian source had previously confirmed that while differences between the two nations had narrowed, no agreement had been reached at that earlier stage. Iran's uranium enrichment programme and its control over the Strait of Hormuz had been identified as key sticking points throughout the process, both of which appear to be addressed in the reported terms.

The question of unfreezing Iran's funds had been flagged by Fars News Agency as the last unresolved issue, subject to active Qatari mediation. With Trump now publicly affirming Iran's eagerness for a deal and the agreement reportedly pending final approval, the negotiation process appears to have reached its concluding stage, though no official confirmation has yet been issued by either government.