U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said that an agreement with Iran to end the conflict could be reached as early as today, while emphasizing Israel’s right to self-defense. Leaving New Delhi, Rubio noted that news on the matter was expected last night and expressed hope that it would appear today. He confirmed that the U.S. is giving diplomacy every chance to succeed before considering alternative options. According to him, Washington will either reach a good agreement with Tehran or act "in another way."
Rubio indicated that on the negotiating table is a "very strong proposal" that includes Iran reopening the strait and holding temporary talks on its nuclear program. He expressed hope for success and noted that the deal enjoys broad support from the Gulf countries. According to the secretary of state, all the states with whom the issue was discussed consider the agreement not only sensible but also "the right step for the whole world." Work on the framework conditions continues; details and wording are still being discussed.
U.S. media reported that the White House believes Tehran has in principle agreed to the framework of the deal, and that 95% of the work is already done. President Donald Trump is inclined to give Iran a few days to conclude the deal. Trump himself said that talks with Tehran are not yet finished but are proceeding in an organized and constructive manner. Sources in the U.S. confirmed that final wording is now being discussed. Washington is prioritizing diplomacy but is leaving other options open if negotiations fail.
Touching on the Israel issue, Rubio stressed that Israel always has the right to defend itself: if Hezbollah launches rockets toward it, Israel has the full right to respond. It is reported that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu received assurances from Trump of Israel’s right to self-defense on all fronts, including Lebanon. This statement underscores the balance of American policy: pursuing a diplomatic solution with Iran while maintaining security support for regional allies.
The U.S. State Department expressed disappointment that the parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons failed to adopt a final document at the 2026 NPT review conference. Washington called the failure disappointing, especially against the backdrop of "Iran’s continued noncompliance with safeguards under the treaty." The U.S. intends to raise the issue of some states’ inability to take seriously the threat Iran poses to the global non-proliferation regime. These events occur amid Israeli concerns that a memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington could limit Netanyahu’s influence on Trump’s decisions, even as the U.S. administration increasingly leans toward a diplomatic path. Both the U.S. and Israel affirm the need to preserve freedom of military action and to focus on sensitive security issues at later stages if necessary. In the coming days it will become clear whether the agreement will indeed be concluded and what its consequences will be for regional stability and the non-proliferation regime.
Comments on the news
Why is control of the Strait of Hormuz a key lever for Iran in negotiations, and what consequences for the world economy could its closure have? — The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow sea passage through which about 20–25% of global oil trade passes (roughly 17–20 million barrels per day). Iran, controlling the strait’s coast and possessing powerful naval and missile forces, can threaten to block this route. In negotiations this gives Tehran leverage: in the event of severe sanctions or a military threat it could trigger a sharp spike in energy prices. Closure of the strait would lead to an immediate oil shortage, pushing prices to $150–200 per barrel, which would cause a global recession, especially in importing countries (EU, China, Japan, India).
What role does Lebanon’s Hezbollah play in Iran’s strategy to deter Israel, and why are its rocket attacks viewed as a threat to regional security? — Hezbollah is a key Iranian proxy on Israel’s southern flank. Tehran uses it to create “multi-layered deterrence”: a huge rocket arsenal (estimated at over 150,000, including precision-guided missiles) can strike key targets across Israel. Rocket attacks from Lebanese territory are seen as a threat because Hezbollah controls the area along the border and can inflict a massive strike that would overload Israel’s air defenses. Additionally, this deters Tel Aviv from open confrontation with Iran, since any response could be large-scale and involve Hezbollah.
Which countries are included among the "Gulf countries" mentioned in the article, and how does their position on Iran’s nuclear program differ from that of the U.S. and Israel? — The Gulf countries include Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Kuwait, Oman and Bahrain (and sometimes Iraq, though it is often treated separately). Their position is more cautious: like the U.S. and Israel, they fear a nuclear Iran, but they prefer diplomatic channels and economic engagement rather than military escalation. Unlike Washington and Tel Aviv, which lean toward maximum pressure or preemptive strikes, the Gulf states seek an agreement that would guarantee their own security and not disrupt energy transit. Oman and Qatar often act as mediators, while Saudi Arabia and the UAE diversify their ties (including rapprochement with China) to reduce dependence on the U.S.
Full version: روبيو: اتفاق إيران قد يُبرم اليوم ولإسرائيل الحق في "الدفاع عن نفسها"