Country Resources

The June 2026 Islamabad memorandum of understanding to halt the U.S.-Israeli war against Iran and reopen the Strait of Hormuz is a flawed but welcome development. This interim agreement aims to halt a misbegotten conflict that has killed thousands of people, disrupted the global economy, and failed to address the proliferation risk posed by Iran’s nuclear program, which cannot be bombed away.

Reports that the United States and Iran finalized a preliminary deal to halt the war is a welcome development that creates a pathway for resuming negotiations on Iran's nuclear program that were underway when the United States and Israel launched their illegal attack on Iran on February 28.

Even if an agreement is reached, both sides said it will not address nuclear issues in detail and more negotiations will be necessary. 

U.S. and Israeli military operations, although setting back Iran’s nuclear capabilities, may have ruined chances for an effective nuclear deal for years to come.

Senior U.S. officials said the Pentagon relied on an AI-powered data-fusion and decision-support program to identify top-priority targets and help choose the weapons used in attacking them.

Iran’s threat to withdraw from the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty came in response to U.S. and Israeli military strikes on its territory. 

If U.S. and Iranian negotiators return to Islamabad for a second round of talks, the United States and Iran will need to bridge the gaps on key nuclear issues to reach an agreement. With pragmatic diplomacy and the political will to compromise, a deal is possible. But the nonproliferation value of any nuclear limitations will be minimal without effective verification. Defining the scope of inspections and monitoring mechanisms is arguably the most important component of an effective deal and should be a U.S. priority. 

President Donald Trump’s April 7 threat that he might escalate U.S. attacks on Iran so that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again,” should profoundly alarm every U.S. and global citizen. 

Special envoy Steve Witkoff’s failure to learn the nuclear file and surround himself with technical experts to negotiate a deal is a diplomatic disservice.

But it is unclear if Tehran is willing to negotiate or if Israel would agree to a ceasefire.

The Trump administration engaged in three rounds of talks with Iran before striking Iran on Feb. 28. Comments from President Donald Trump's lead negotiator, Steve Witkoff, however, suggest that the White House missed a diplomatic opportunity because the negotiating team was ill-prepared for talks and lacked the technical expertise to engage in effective diplomacy. 

U.S. President Donald Trump continues to allege, without evidence, that Iran’s nuclear program posed an imminent threat to the United States. The following are answers to frequently asked questions about Iran’s proliferation risk and nuclear security issues.

U.S. President Donald Trump and senior administration officials have offered conflicting justifications for the renewed U.S. strikes on Iran, including the claim that Iran’s nuclear and  missile programs posed an imminent threat to the United States. There is no evidence, however, to support those claims. Read this issue brief for answers to FAQs on these claims.

The U.S.-Israeli military operation prompted Iranian counterstrikes and occurred two days after U.S. and Iranian negotiators met in Geneva for negotiations on a nuclear deal.

Eight years after abandoning the 2015 nuclear deal that was effectively blocking Iran’s path to a bomb, and less than a year after Israeli and U.S. forces struck key Iranian nuclear facilities, U.S. President Donald Trump has dispatched his envoys to try to persuade Iran to permanently give the option to enrich uranium or face another, possibly much larger, U.S. attack.