Axios reporter Barak Ravid reported overnight new details of the emerging U.S.–Iran framework that would center on a 60-day memorandum aimed at keeping the ceasefire in place and reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Under the reported terms, Iran would allow ships to pass freely through the strait, while Washington would issue sanctions waivers allowing Tehran to sell oil. Additionally, American forces would remain in the region as negotiations continued over Iran’s nuclear program.

The Axios report lined up with a parallel report by the Qatar-backed Arabic outlet Al-Araby Al-Jadeed, which cited a Pakistani Foreign Ministry source saying Islamabad’s proposal also includes a 60-day ceasefire extension and the reopening of Hormuz. According to the report, the proposal would also remove the blockade on Iranian ports and include discussions on easing restrictions on frozen Iranian funds. Al-Araby Al-Jadeed also reported that Lebanon would also be included in the framework, with Washington and Tehran supporting dialogue between Lebanon and Israel. The practical meaning of that clause remains unclear, and there has been no confirmed report that the U.S. agreed to restrict Israeli military action in Lebanon.

The sharpest contradiction emerged over Iran’s uranium stockpile. The New York Times reported that Iran had agreed in principle to give up its highly enriched uranium as part of the expected arrangement, while leaving the mechanism for later nuclear negotiations.

However, Reuters later reported that a senior Iranian source denied Tehran had agreed to give up the stockpile and said the nuclear issue was not part of the preliminary agreement with Washington. Iran’s Tasnim news agency also reported that one or two clauses remain disputed, saying Tehran told the Pakistani mediator the memorandum cannot be completed if the U.S. continues placing “obstacles.”

Fox News reported another unresolved condition: an American demand for U.S. forces to remain near Iran for 30 days under the framework. Iranian officials have reportedly objected to that term, leaving the emerging arrangement still short of a finalized agreement.