President Donald Trump has again authorized air strikes targeting locations in southern Iran amid ongoing tensions in the region, while simultaneously suggesting that a number of Arab nations may soon formalize peace agreements with Israel. However, the move appears to set the stage for a limited ceasefire deal that addresses only a fraction of the wider conflict and largely on terms favorable to Tehran.

As of the 50th day of a proposed 14-day ceasefire, the Trump administration is reportedly considering a temporary arrangement involving two main concessions. Under the tentative plan, Iran would agree to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping route, in exchange for the United States lifting its blockade of Iranian ports. Additionally, Iran would dismantle uranium stockpiles enriched to 60 percent purity—the threshold nearing weapons-grade level—in return for the release of billions of dollars in frozen assets. Beyond these points, the broader future of Iran’s nuclear program and other contentious issues would be deferred to future negotiations.

Critics of the plan highlight that it would primarily serve to reverse consequences stemming directly from the Trump administration’s past policies. In 2018, Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the 2015 nuclear agreement negotiated during Barack Obama’s presidency, which imposed limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment levels. Following the U.S. exit, Tehran rapidly escalated enrichment efforts, reaching 60 percent purity, the highest level to date.

Similarly, Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz and the resulting global economic disruption began after the U.S. and Israel launched military operations on February 28, actions intended to pressure Tehran amid deteriorating relations. Thus, the contemplated deal would effectively restore conditions that existed prior to the recent escalation, conceding some ground to Iran in exchange for a partial resolution.

The plan also marks a departure from earlier U.S. objectives. Initially, Trump had promised regime change in Iran, urging Iranians to overthrow the Islamic Republic’s leadership, a goal now evidently abandoned as the government appears poised to maintain power. Likewise, efforts to impose restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program and nuclear facilities have been sidelined, with recent military campaigns deliberately avoiding direct strikes on nuclear sites.

Concerns persist that any swift agreement lifting sanctions and ending the blockade could weaken U.S. leverage in future diplomacy. Analysts question why Iran would accept long-term limitations on its nuclear development if the immediate pressures of air strikes and embargoes are removed without firm commitments. Reopening the Strait of Hormuz would implicitly recognize Iranian control over this strategic passage, potentially signaling a shift in regional dynamics.

As the Trump administration moves toward what may be a truncated peace accord, observers caution that such a deal may resolve only select issues created by the policies of the past several years, leaving underlying disputes unresolved and the prospect of renewed tension intact.