US has ‘every intent of getting’ Iran deal done Sunday: Ambassador Waltz

U.S. Seeks to Finalize Iran Agreement by Sunday: UN Envoy Waltz

US has every intent of getting - On June 14, 2026, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Mike Waltz expressed confidence that a preliminary agreement with Iran would be signed by Sunday. While acknowledging the White House would handle the specifics, Waltz emphasized that President Donald Trump “has every intent of getting” the deal finalized by the end of the week. This statement came during an interview on ABC News’ “This Week,” where Waltz addressed questions about the timeline and certainty of the agreement’s completion.

Confidence in the Signing Process

When asked about the mechanics of the signing and the likelihood of it occurring on Sunday, ABC’s co-anchor Martha Raddatz prompted Waltz for clarification. He responded, “The president has every intent of getting this done today.” Waltz noted that while the exact details would be managed by the White House, the Iranian side’s internal challenges—particularly the difficulty in securing consistent guidance from their supreme leader—could influence the outcome. “They’re incredibly difficult negotiators,” he said, adding that the team’s cohesion remains a concern.

Despite these hurdles, Waltz insisted that U.S. officials and their Iranian counterparts were “confident” the deal would proceed as planned. The agreement, he explained, aims to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and address remaining issues related to Iran’s nuclear program within a 60-day period. However, Iran has not yet confirmed the Sunday timeline, leaving some uncertainty about the finalization date. A spokesperson for Iran’s foreign ministry stated on Saturday that a memorandum of understanding was “highly likely” to be concluded in the coming days.

Key Provisions of the Agreement

The deal, still in its early stages, includes commitments from Iran to dismantle parts of its nuclear infrastructure. A senior administration official revealed that the agreement would involve the

“dismantling” of Iran’s nuclear program

and the removal of highly enriched uranium from the country. Waltz elaborated, “The highly enriched uranium has to go. Their enrichment capabilities, they have to walk away from. Their support for terrorist proxies has to end.” This framework, he argued, represents a significant shift from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which had broader terms and less stringent verification measures.

Waltz highlighted the importance of verification in the new deal, contrasting it with the JCPOA’s perceived weaknesses. “There were huge gaps in the JCPOA regarding actual verification,” he said. The 2015 agreement, he explained, allowed Iran to classify certain facilities as military sites, effectively shielding them from inspections. “The Iranians could delay things. They could choose which inspectors to accept or not. Most importantly, Martha, they could classify sites as military and make them off-limits,” he added. These loopholes, Waltz claimed, would be eliminated in the upcoming negotiations.

Under the previous JCPOA, sanctions were lifted after Iran fulfilled its nuclear obligations, but the process took time. The U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) only certified Iran’s compliance six months after the deal was signed, leading to debates about its effectiveness. Waltz asserted that the current agreement would avoid such delays, ensuring that Iran’s actions are continuously monitored. “I can promise you that we are not going to have these massive loopholes,” he said, underscoring the administration’s commitment to stricter oversight.

Challenges and Uncertainties Ahead

While the deal’s framework appears to address key concerns, its details remain unclear. A senior official described the agreement as a step toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a critical maritime route for global oil trade, but stressed that the full terms would be fleshed out in subsequent talks. The focus on “pay for performance” mechanisms, as outlined by Waltz, suggests that Iran’s actions—such as limiting uranium enrichment—would be rewarded with sanctions relief, rather than upfront financial guarantees.

Martha Raddatz pressed Waltz during the interview, asking, “And they have agreed to that?” He confirmed, “And all of those things, they are— they are agreeing to.” However, he also acknowledged that the deal was only a memorandum of understanding, with many specifics yet to be determined. “A lot of these details are going to be worked out as we go forward into the next round of negotiation,” he said, highlighting the ongoing nature of the talks.

Meanwhile, former Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman, who played a pivotal role in negotiating the 2015 JCPOA, offered her perspective. In a separate segment of the “This Week” broadcast, she noted that the current timeframe for completing the agreement may be unrealistic. “The timeframe isn’t realistic,” she stated, suggesting that the political and logistical challenges of the new deal could extend beyond the initial 60-day window. Sherman also hinted that the resulting agreement might resemble the JCPOA in some aspects, though with updated verification protocols.

As the U.S. and Iran prepare to finalize the deal, the focus remains on ensuring compliance with nuclear restrictions and securing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. The successful implementation of these terms could stabilize the region and ease tensions that have persisted since the 2015 agreement. However, the absence of detailed public information has raised questions about the agreement’s scope and Iran’s willingness to adhere to its commitments. Analysts and policymakers continue to monitor the developments, recognizing that the deal’s success hinges on both sides’ ability to navigate the complexities of the negotiations.

Historical Context and Future Implications

The 2015 JCPOA, which replaced earlier sanctions, was a landmark agreement that reduced Iran’s nuclear capabilities in exchange for sanctions relief. While it achieved its goals, critics argued that its verification mechanisms were insufficient. The new deal seeks to rectify these shortcomings by introducing more rigorous oversight. For instance, the 2015 agreement allowed Iran to delay inspections and classify sites as military, creating opportunities for non-compliance. The updated framework, Waltz emphasized, would prevent such scenarios by requiring immediate and transparent verification processes.

Additionally, the new deal’s emphasis on “pay for performance” reflects a shift in U.S. strategy. Instead of offering Iran financial incentives upfront, the agreement ties sanctions relief to tangible actions, such as reducing uranium enrichment capacity. This approach aims to ensure that Iran fulfills its commitments without room for maneuver. However, the effectiveness of this model depends on the ability of inspectors to monitor progress and Iran’s willingness to cooperate. Waltz acknowledged that these details would be refined in the coming weeks, as the two sides work toward a final agreement.

As the deadline for the Sunday signing approaches, the international community watches closely. The agreement’s success could mark a turning point in U.S.-Iran relations, potentially easing economic pressures and fostering diplomatic engagement. Yet, the challenges of negotiating with a team that has internal divisions and a history of non-compliance remain. The finalization of the deal on Sunday would be a significant step forward, but its long-term impact will depend on the verification processes and Iran’s adherence to the terms. For now, the White House and its Iranian counterparts are focused on making the agreement a reality, even as questions linger about its full implications.

Images of vessels navigating the Strait of Hormuz near Bandar Abbas, Iran, on June 11, 2026, underscore the strategic importance of the region. The reopening of this corridor would not only facilitate trade but also signal a thaw in relations between the U.S. and Iran. As the negotiations reach their critical phase, the combination of political will and strict verification measures will be key to ensuring the agreement’s durability. With the deadline looming, all eyes are on the White House and Iran’s foreign ministry to deliver a deal that satisfies both parties and addresses the region’s security concerns.