Trump's Deal with Iran: Why the New Memorandum is Fundamentally Different from Obama's Nuclear Pact
Donald Trump signed an agreement with Iran that halts nearly four months of military conflict and reopens the Strait of Hormuz. However, the new document is not simply a copy of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). It is a fundamentally different approach, built on pressure rather than compromise.
Two Worlds — Two Philosophies
The JCPOA, concluded by the Barack Obama administration, was a multilateral agreement uniting the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia, China, and the EU. In exchange for verifiable limits on Iran's nuclear program, Tehran received partial sanctions relief. This was a containment strategy designed for decades.
Trump chose the opposite path. He withdrew from the JCPOA in 2018, imposed a maximum pressure campaign, and returned to negotiations only after a series of military strikes on Iran. The main difference lies in the sequence: Obama started with diplomacy, Trump started with an economic and military ultimatum.
Timelines and Scale: From 159 Pages to a Quick Memorandum
The JCPOA spanned about 159 pages and took nearly two years to develop. Trump's new agreement is a framework memorandum, negotiated remotely with Qatar and Pakistan acting as mediators. A signing ceremony is planned in Geneva, while a 60-day ceasefire regime has been established for now, with discussion of the nuclear program postponed to the next stage.
Critics of the old deal argued it merely delayed the inevitable. Trump's new approach is an attempt to break the vicious cycle, using strict but temporary frameworks to achieve concrete results.
The Enrichment Issue: A Red Line for Tehran
The JCPOA allowed Iran to enrich uranium domestically to 3.67% for 15 years, with a limit of 5,060 centrifuges and a stockpile not exceeding 300 kg. This increased the time needed to create a nuclear weapon from a few months to a year. However, after 10 years, restrictions on centrifuges began to be lifted, and after 15 years, the enrichment conditions weakened.
Trump took a path of tightening restrictions. His team sought a complete ban or strict limits on uranium enrichment in Iran, insisting on longer timelines. After the US withdrawal from the deal in 2018, the limits ceased to apply, and by May 2025, the IAEA recorded stockpiles of over 400 kg of uranium enriched to 60% — a level close to weapons-grade.
Today, Iran is the only non-nuclear-weapon state engaging in enrichment at this level. The new 2026 memorandum has not yet resolved the fate of these stockpiles, but it will become clear in the coming weeks what Tehran intends to do with them.
Sanctions: From Unfreezing to Phased Lifting
The Obama administration opened access to the deal's benefits for Iran as quickly as possible: unfreezing assets and allowing oil exports. The US Treasury estimated that Tehran could receive around $50 billion. The Trump team implemented a phased and reversible mechanism for lifting restrictions. Iranian media mentioned $24 billion in frozen assets, but Vice President Vance refuted this figure, emphasizing it is absent from the official text. The money will only be transferred after the terms of the deal are met.
Additionally, under the new framework, sanctions on Iranian oil and petrochemical exports are suspended, but European countries have indicated they will only lift restrictions after Tehran confirms compliance with the agreements. This is a fundamental difference from the JCPOA, where sanctions were lifted upfront.
Frameworks and Levers of Pressure
The JCPOA dealt exclusively with the nuclear program. Issues of ballistic missiles and support for regional allies, such as Hezbollah, were not addressed. Trump demands that the new terms also cover this area. His memorandum links progress to the unblocking of the Strait of Hormuz and overall regional security.
The differences are clear: Obama bet on multilateral compromise, Trump on unilateral pressure and stricter, longer-term conditions. Supporters of the old deal warn that pressure could backfire, noting that the Iranian program accelerated most rapidly precisely after the US withdrawal in 2018.
As an analyst, I see in Trump's approach an attempt to correct the structural flaws of the JCPOA, but the risk here is colossal. If pressure does not lead to Tehran's capitulation on key points, we could face not just a resumption of conflict, but an escalation to a level that makes diplomacy impossible. The next 60 days will show whether "hard power" works where "soft power" failed.