US-Iran deal triggers 60-day period to reach final agreement | BBC News

Welcome to the Global News podcast. I'm. Valerie Sanderson, and I'm joined from. Washington by our reporter there, Bernd. Debusmann. Bernd, an agreement has been. signed between Iran and the US to end. their war. Remind us what the main. points of this agreement are. >> Well, there are 14 separate points in. the agreement. I think the the main. things are are that A, uh there's a. 60-day pause on any sort of fighting or. military action. That's made very clear. in one of the initial points. There's. also the promise of further discussions.

on Iran's nuclear program. There's very. few specifics in the actual document. that's been signed, but essentially the. two sides will get together as soon as. or or late late this week to discuss. what that actually looks like. There is. a minimum standard for what happens with. Iran's highly enriched uranium, which is. President Trump's overarching goal in. this, that it be diluted in place. But, that's a very technical discussion that. will have to be ironed out over a much. longer time frame. And the Obama. administration, for example, took 20.

months to discuss the accelerated of the. Iran Iran's nuclear program, rather. So, it's a very accelerated timeline to. discuss that. Of course, the Strait of. Hormuz will now be opened, and the. blockade of Iranian ports will now be. lifted. But, it is a performance-based. agreement. So, if Iran complies with its. part of the agreement, it begins reaping. more benefits of the blockade being. lifted, for example. And I think one of. the most crucial things, and this is. something that's been very important to.

the Iranian side, is there's mention of. a $300 billion reconstruction fund. Now, it's we still don't know what exactly. that fund looks like. The US and. President Trump have been very clear. that that money won't come directly from. the US, but it does open the possibility. that Gulf countries, the UAE, for. example, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, could. contribute to some sort of. reconstruction for the damage that Iran. suffered during Operation Epic Fury. I. think those are the three main uh uh.

bullet points of that 14-point. agreement. >> And of course, what everyone wants to. know, Behrendt, is, you know, who got. the better end of the deal? >> Well, both sides, I think, are already. claiming victory. Now, President Trump. has said his main. goal with this whole campaign and the. subsequent negotiations has been that. Iran will not have a nuclear weapon. Now, that's written in the deal, of. course. As I mentioned, that's a very. technical discussion that we don't. actually have the details of what that. looks like. And President Trump also is.

claiming victory because the Strait of. Hormuz is now open. Now, that's a much. more controversial point here. domestically in the US because the. Strait of Hormuz was open before Donald. Trump and Israel began striking Iran on. February 28th. Uh on the Iranian side, A, it keeps their government intact. There's a pledge to not that the US. won't involve itself in Iranian domestic. matters. Uh which, you know, of course, that will be greatly disappointing to. Iranian dissidents or those people that. believe that President Trump would come. help them uh protest against the regime,

for example. Uh and there's no mention. of Iran's ballistic missile program, for. example. Um so, that remains a. capability that can be intact in the. future. I think both sides will claim. victories on the same By that same logic. though, on both sides, there's people. that think this agreement wasn't enough. In the US, there's been it's been quite. controversial. People thought the war. shouldn't have started Many people. thought the war shouldn't have started. in the first place. Others think this. agreement didn't really address the core.

issues. And in Iran, hardliners are. uncomfortable with what they see as too. many concessions being made to the US. >> But as you said, there's been criticism, especially where you are, and from. Democrats, and crucially, also from. Republicans, President Trump's own. party. >> That's true. I mean, Democrats uh have. been largely against this war from the. beginning, so I think it's no surprise. that they've been very critical. There. had already been an agreement on Iran's. nuclear program in place since the Obama. administration, it's known as the JCPOA,

and the the logic from Democrats has. been that if President Trump didn't see. that agreement as fit, he could have. adjusted it rather than. essentially what he did in his first. term was tear it up and then return to. war. Now, other Republicans think that. this that the agreement doesn't go far. enough, that it does nothing really to. guarantee Israel's security for one, that it does nothing to stop Iran's. support of proxy militias such as.

Hezbollah in Lebanon or the Houthis in. Yemen, and that essentially now the US. is reconstructing what it just spent. considerable amounts of money and 13. dead American servicemen to deconstruct. So, there's quite a lot of consternation. and and several, including people who. are very close to President Trump, usually Senator Ted Cruz of Texas for. example, they've been very critical. And. one Republican Senator, outgoing Senator. Bill Cassidy, has called this the. greatest foreign policy blunder in.

generations. So, I think he'll certainly. be coming under some criticism from Iran. hawks in his own party, and there are. people of his own party who didn't think. this war was a very good idea to begin. with given that President Trump had. promised no foreign entanglements when. he ran for office. >> Well, you mentioned Israel. There's a. very strong Israeli lobby in the US, isn't there? And we understand that. Israel wants to remain in Lebanon where. it's fighting against Hezbollah, even. though this agreement should encompass.

Israel as well, and the war should stop. on all sides. >> And President Trump over time has become. increasingly aware that Lebanon, perhaps. more than any other issue, is what. threatens to upend this deal. Over the. last few weeks, we've seen him be. increasingly publicly vocal about his. displeasure with Israeli Prime Minister. Benjamin Netanyahu over continued. strikes in Lebanon. And really, that's. been kind of the strongest language. we've heard from this president who has. otherwise really been a steadfast ally.

of of Israel's. He believes that while. Israel has a right to defend itself, he's called into question the methods in. which it claims to defend itself, the. striking of residential buildings in. Lebanon, for example. So, I think he'll. be leaning on on Prime Minister. Netanyahu quite hard. Of course, that. puts the Prime Minister in a very. awkward position at home. He is facing. an electoral battle. There are people. who in Israel who think that this deal. isn't something that Israel should abide.

by. And at the same time, Netanyahu has kind. of framed himself as being a. security-focused Prime Minister. So, any. damage in the relationship with the US, Israel's main security benefactor, it's. the greatest recipient of US military. aid anywhere in the world, also. complicates that for him. So, I think. we'll be hearing quite a lot about that. from people who feel strongly about. Israel here in Washington, particularly. on Capitol Hill, many of whom have. already started calling into question. why. in their belief Israel isn't more.

protected by the by the conclusion of. this deal. >> [snorts]. >> And what about this $300 billion aid. package that's going to go to Iran? I. mean, what's the view of that in the US? >> Well, that's a particularly interesting. one cuz President Trump's main. gripe with the JCPOA under President. Obama was that funds were given to Iran. for compliance. Now, to make those. things be kind of more in contrast, President Trump, Vice President Pence,

and other US officials have said that. none of that money will actually be. coming from the US. That could come from. Gulf allies, the UAE, for example, was. given an example by White House. officials yesterday. If they chose to. invest money in Iran's reconstruction, the US wouldn't stand in the way. And. other bits of that money are are already. Iranian money that's been frozen in. foreign banks, and that'll now be. released to Iran if they comply with. their part of the agreement. At the same. time, I think Iran hawks in particular.

are very uh. nervous about Iran being given an. economic lifeline at a time when it was. quite struggling because of the blockade. on its ports and being cut off from the. world financial system. Now, money. hundreds and billion hundreds of. millions of dollars will start being. released to Iran uh over the next 60. days as these negotiations continue, which helps the Iranian government find. its feet again after what was. essentially a very difficult period. Uh. but, the Trump administration is very.

much framing as it's not our money, and. we're not giving it to them to the. American people. >> And what's your sense, Ben, of how this. is all going down with Americans. themselves, with the average American. voter? Are they happy just to see an end. of this war? >> Well, I think in part, yes. This war was. never particularly popular to begin. with, and in that it's been very. different than previous US wars that. began with widespread popularity, the. war in Iraq, for example, and became. less popular over time. Polls showed. that this one was never very popular to.

begin with, and it became less popular. as Americans went to the petrol pump and. found themselves paying more money. I. think when those prices start to come. down, and we've already seen them start. to come down, Americans will feel very. much relieved that this conflict is. over. Of course, that doesn't address. the core question that many of them had. is why this conflict began in the first. place, and really what has the US. gained? I think uh Democrats in. particular will point to those falling. petrol prices and say that they were. elevated because this conflict began.

So, many Americans, I think, will be. very relieved that this conflict is. over, but there's still quite a lot of. uh misunderstanding or a lack of. understanding about why this war began. and what exactly the US achieved over. the course of this conflict. >> And Bert, how precarious do you think. this is because we're now entering a. 60-day. ahead of us, aren't we, where all this. has got to be finalized if it's to stay. in place? >> Well, I think at the moment at least all.

signs indicate that neither side really. has the appetite to return to full-scale. military conflict. Even in recent weeks. when we saw the US and Iran trade fire. at several points, it was quite clear. that the US nor the Iranians wanted to. return to conflict. At the same time, things are quite precarious. Secretary of Defense Pete Hoekstra has. said that if Iran doesn't comply with. the various points set out in the. memorandum, the US is fully prepared to. reinstall the blockade on Iranian ports.

And if that happens, one can imagine a. situation in which tensions skyrocket. again across the Gulf or that Iran might. therefore take action to cut off the. Strait of Hormuz again. There's also the. question of Lebanon. Even after the. memorandum of understanding was signed, we saw Israeli strikes in Lebanon. And I. think one of the ultimate tests of this. agreement will to see how much Israel. continues those operations despite US. pressure and how much patience Iran has.

for those Israeli strikes in Lebanon, which they've made very clear they see. as subject to part of the steel even if. the Israelis don't think so. >> Thanks, Bert. Bert de Boismond there in. Washington, our White House reporter. If. you want more on this story, just listen. to the Global News Podcast. Click on the. link below. But that's it from this. edition of the Global News Podcast here. on YouTube. Thanks for listening. Thanks. for watching. And bye for now.