United News of Bangladesh

President Donald Trump has announced new double-digit tariffs on imports from dozens of US trading partners as temporary worldwide tariffs introduced earlier this year expired on Friday. The new tariffs, ranging from 10% to 12.5%, will apply to imports from 60 trading partners that account for about 99% of US imports. The Trump administration said the countries had failed to adequately enforce bans on goods produced through forced labour. "The United States has had a forced labour import ban for nearly a century and enforces it strictly. It is time for our trading partners to do the same," US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer said. The tariffs replace the temporary 10% global import duties that expired at 12:01 a.m. Friday. Those temporary tariffs had been introduced after the US Supreme Court ruled in February that Trump did not have the authority to impose his earlier broad tariffs under emergency powers. To introduce the new measures, the administration is using Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, which allows the president to impose tariffs on countries found to have unfair or unreasonable trade practices. Trump also relied on the same law during his first term to impose tariffs on Chinese goods. The administration is also investigating whether 16 countries have overproduced goods in ways that hurt US manufacturers. Those countries account for about 70% of US imports, and additional tariffs could follow once the investigation is completed. Trump argues that higher tariffs will help revive US manufacturing. Last year, he reversed decades of US policy supporting lower tariffs and freer trade by imposing import duties on goods from nearly every country, citing the country's long-running trade deficit as a national emergency. However, the Supreme Court later ruled that the emergency law used for those tariffs did not authorize such measures, forcing the government to refund importers that had already paid the duties. The administration first proposed the new forced labour-related tariffs last month. Since then, some countries have strengthened enforcement measures and qualified for lower tariff rates, according to a senior administration official. For example, India's tariff rate was initially set at 12.5% but has been reduced to 10% after it improved enforcement against forced labour imports, the official said. Some products, including oil, natural gas and fertilizer, are exempt from the new tariffs. Goods that qualify for duty-free treatment under the US-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) are also excluded. The move drew criticism from some lawmakers and trading partners. Representative Richard Neal, the top Democrat on the House Ways and Means Committee, accused the administration of using forced labour as an excuse for its tariff policy. "Forced labour is a serious issue that deserves strong enforcement, not to be used as a justification for questionable tariff policies," he said. Brazil, which faces a 12.5% tariff, called the decision "arbitrary and unjustified" and said it would invoke its reciprocity law, which could lead to retaliatory tariffs on US goods. The Brazilian government also plans to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization. Chile, which also faces a 12.5% tariff, said it has strong labour protections and argued that the US decision was not supported by the evidence presented during the investigation. Under US law, tariffs are paid by American companies importing foreign goods. Those businesses often pass the extra costs on to consumers through higher prices, raising concerns that the new measures could increase living costs ahead of the November midterm elections. Human rights groups said they remain cautious about the administration's motives but acknowledged that import restrictions could help combat forced labour. The International Labour Organization estimates that around 27.6 million people worldwide were trapped in forced labour in 2021. Martina Vandenberg, founder of The Human Trafficking Legal Center, said import bans can be an effective tool against forced labour but warned they should be introduced gradually to give countries time to strengthen enforcement. "Our concern is that import bans may exist only on paper without proper enforcement," she said. Canada said the latest US action was expected. Canada-US Trade Minister Dominic LeBlanc said Canada shares Washington's goal of preventing goods made through forced labour from entering supply chains and would continue discussions with the United States on the issue. Experts also noted that the threat of new tariffs has already prompted some countries, including India, to strengthen their policies against forced labour, while new European Union rules due next year are expected to increase pressure on global supply chains.

President Donald Trump is set to promote his administration's Trump Accounts program during a visit to a high school in Georgia on Wednesday, even as some parents say they are still waiting for the promised $1,000 government contribution for their newborns. The Trump Accounts, launched on July 4, provide a $1,000 government-funded investment for every child born during Trump's second term. The tax-advantaged accounts were introduced under Trump's signature One Big Beautiful Bill and can be opened for any child under the age of 18. According to the US Treasury Department, about 6.5 million accounts have been opened so far. Of those, around 1.5 million belong to children born between 2025 and 2028 who qualify for the $1,000 government deposit. Supporters say the programme will help more Americans build wealth by encouraging investment in the stock market from an early age. Once the accounts are opened, parents, relatives, friends and employers can add money. The funds are invested in stock market index funds managed by private firms. The money cannot be withdrawn until the child turns 18 and can then be used only for approved purposes, such as higher education, starting a business or buying a home. However, some parents say they have not yet received the promised government deposit. Masaki and Kristina McLellan of New Jersey opened a Trump Account for their daughter Maya, who was born in late March. Although they were initially hesitant because they viewed the programme as politically motivated, the $1,000 incentive convinced them to sign up. Masaki McLellan said he applied on July 6. His first application was rejected, but the account was activated after he contacted the programme's customer service hotline. He was initially told the government contribution would arrive within 10 days but was later informed it could take up to four weeks. Kristina McLellan said she was disappointed by the delay, although the family has already opened other investment accounts for their daughter, including a college savings plan and a custodial brokerage account. "We definitely want to give her options for her future and make sure she can choose what she wants to do," she said. The Treasury Department described the delay as part of the normal processing period, similar to waiting for a tax refund. It said most families receive the government contribution within one or two days, but officials provide a longer estimate to account for possible processing delays. The department said the programme allows families of all income levels to invest in their children's future and claimed it has become the most successful government-backed savings programme in US history, with around one million new sign-ups each month before its official launch. Trump's visit to Georgia comes as he and fellow Republicans face growing scrutiny over the economy ahead of the midterm elections. An Associated Press-NORC poll conducted in June found that only 33% of US adults approved of Trump's handling of the economy, one of his lowest ratings during his second term. Trump Accounts resemble the "baby bonds" programmes introduced in some Democratic-led states and cities to reduce wealth inequality among children. However, unlike many of those programmes, Trump's initiative is available to families regardless of income. Critics argue the accounts provide little help during a child's early years, when families are most vulnerable to poverty, homelessness and food insecurity. They also point out that the legislation creating the programme reduced funding for several programmes widely used by children, including Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

US President Donald Trump is expected to revisit his long-standing claims about the 2020 presidential election during a primetime address from the White House on Thursday, despite years of official findings that the election was secure, legitimate and free of widespread fraud. Following Trump's 2020 election defeat to Joe Biden, officials appointed by Trump to lead the Justice Department, intelligence agencies and cybersecurity bodies consistently concluded that there was no evidence of major fraud or foreign interference that could have changed the election outcome. Since returning to office for a second term, Trump has sought to challenge those conclusions. He has appointed senior officials who support his claims that the 2020 election was stolen and has made clear that he expects his administration to align with that position. The issue has become a key loyalty test for many of Trump's nominees. During his Senate confirmation hearing on Wednesday, Jay Clayton, Trump's nominee for national intelligence director, avoided directly saying Biden won the election. "He had the most electoral votes," Clayton said. "He was declared the winner." When Democratic Senator Mark Kelly pressed him on whether the person with the most electoral votes is the winner, Clayton declined to answer directly. Trump has repeatedly promoted conspiracy theories alleging that an international network manipulated US voting machines in 2020, claims that have been rejected by courts and election officials and have triggered several high-profile defamation lawsuits. Ahead of Thursday's address, Trump promised to reveal "really big news," saying that "without free and fair elections, you don't have a country." Election experts, however, fear the speech could revive false claims that have already been extensively investigated. "There have been more than six years of consistent findings from intelligence agencies and election experts showing there was no foreign interference in the 2020 election and that US voting systems were secure," said Victoria Bassetti of States United, a nonpartisan organisation that supports state election officials. She said any new claims without evidence would contradict years of documented findings. Years of reviews found no widespread fraud Numerous court rulings, audits, recounts and investigations — including several conducted by Republican officials — found no evidence of widespread fraud or significant problems with the 2020 election. Trump and his allies lost dozens of legal challenges seeking to overturn the election results, including cases heard by judges appointed by Trump himself. Former Attorney General William Barr, who served under Trump, said there was no evidence of significant election fraud, a conclusion that drew Trump's criticism. Chris Krebs, the former head of the federal cybersecurity agency responsible for protecting election infrastructure, also declared the 2020 election secure and said there was no evidence of vote tampering. Trump dismissed Krebs shortly afterward and later ordered an investigation into him after returning to office in 2025. An intelligence assessment completed on Jan. 7, 2021, during Trump's final days of his first term, also found no evidence that foreign actors altered vote totals or election equipment. In addition, Trump signed a federal review document last year stating that there was no evidence any foreign government had altered vote counting or the outcome of any US election. Fresh federal review underway After returning to office, Trump ordered a new federal review of the 2020 election. Federal investigators have seized voting records from Fulton County, Georgia, and Maricopa County, Arizona — two key counties that featured prominently in post-election conspiracy theories. Trump appointed attorney Kurt Olsen to lead the investigation. Olsen has been associated with election fraud claims and was previously sanctioned by the Arizona Supreme Court for making false statements in a lawsuit challenging the 2022 Arizona governor's race. David Becker, a former Justice Department lawyer who now heads the Center for Election Integrity & Research, criticised the renewed investigation. "He has committed untold taxpayer resources," Becker said. "They've found nothing." According to Becker, search warrant documents filed in the Fulton County investigation repeated conspiracy theories that had already been disproved, while the FBI reassigned hundreds of analysts to review the material. Conspiracy theories fuel costly lawsuits Despite repeated official findings, supporters of election conspiracy theories continue to claim that Trump will eventually present conclusive evidence of widespread fraud. One widely circulated theory alleges that Venezuela and other countries manipulated US voting machines to prevent Trump's victory. Those allegations have led to major defamation lawsuits against media organisations and individuals. Fox News agreed to pay $787.5 million to settle a lawsuit over broadcasting false claims about voting machines after the 2020 election. Newsmax and One America News have also reached settlements with voting technology companies over similar allegations. Separately, a Denver jury found Mike Lindell, a leading promoter of election conspiracy theories whom Trump recently endorsed for governor of Minnesota, liable for defaming an employee of a voting machine company by calling him a traitor. Becker said the pattern over the past six years has remained consistent: broad public allegations have repeatedly failed when tested in court because they lacked supporting evidence. "If someone's alleging a crime that occurred six years ago, we shouldn't simply respond to the claims," Becker said. "We should require evidence that proves them."

Greenland’s strategic location, vast mineral resources and growing importance in Arctic security continue to make the autonomous Danish territory a focal point of US President Donald Trump’s foreign policy ambitions. Situated largely above the Arctic Circle between North America and Europe, Greenland has gained renewed geopolitical significance amid rising tensions involving Russia and China, the effects of climate change and the prospect of new Arctic shipping routes. Trump has repeatedly argued that US control over Greenland is essential for national and global security, saying the island is critical to protecting North America and safeguarding the Arctic region. Although he previously suggested military action was an option, he has since indicated that force is no longer under consideration. His renewed interest in Greenland has unsettled NATO allies and drawn firm opposition from both Denmark and Greenland's government, which insists the island’s future must be decided by its own people. Greenland, home to around 56,000 people—mostly Indigenous Inuit—has been a strategic military asset since World War II, when the United States established a presence there to prevent Nazi Germany from gaining control and to protect North Atlantic shipping routes. The island has become increasingly important as climate change reduces Arctic sea ice, opening the possibility of new international trade routes while intensifying competition over access to natural resources. Security analysts note that Russia has expanded its military infrastructure across the Arctic in recent years, while China has sought a greater role in the region through its self-declared status as a "near-Arctic state" and plans for a Polar Silk Road under its Belt and Road Initiative. The United States already maintains a significant military presence in Greenland through the Pituffik Space Base in the island’s northwest. The installation plays a key role in missile warning, missile defence and space surveillance operations for both the US and NATO. Greenland also overlooks the strategically important Greenland-Iceland-United Kingdom (GIUK) Gap, a vital maritime corridor used by NATO to monitor Russian naval movements in the North Atlantic. Despite Trump's arguments, some defence experts say the US already enjoys extensive military access to Greenland under long-standing agreements with Denmark, making formal control of the territory unnecessary from a security standpoint. Denmark has also expanded defence cooperation with Washington by allowing greater US military access to Danish bases, while making clear it would oppose any attempt to annex Greenland. Beyond security, Greenland's vast reserves of rare earth minerals have attracted growing international attention. These critical minerals are essential for manufacturing advanced technologies, including electric vehicle batteries, smartphones, computers and defence equipment. Western countries have sought to diversify supplies of these strategic minerals as they attempt to reduce dependence on China, which dominates global rare earth production. However, Greenland's harsh Arctic climate, limited infrastructure and strict environmental regulations continue to pose major challenges to large-scale mining and resource development.

NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte heads into this week's NATO summit in Turkey facing a new challenge as US President Donald Trump shifts his focus from defense spending to demanding greater "loyalty" from America's allies. Since taking office nearly two years ago, Rutte has spent much of his time trying to keep the United States committed to the 32-member military alliance. He has often praised Trump in an effort to ease tensions over the president's repeated threats to pull the US out of NATO. For years, Trump's main complaint was that European allies were not spending enough on defense. At last year's NATO summit, member countries agreed to significantly increase military spending, bringing it closer to US levels as a share of national economic output. But NATO now faces a different challenge: turning that extra money into stronger military capabilities, especially as European countries grow increasingly concerned about the threat from Russia. During a White House meeting last month, Rutte presented Trump with a chart titled "The Trump Trillion," highlighting that European allies and Canada have invested $1.2 trillion in defense since 2017. However, Trump appeared unimpressed. He criticized some NATO allies for refusing to join the US and Israel in military action against Iran, saying he wanted "loyalty" rather than financial contributions. "We don't need their money. We don't need anything. I just want loyalty," Trump said. Trump also suggested he might have skipped the upcoming NATO summit if it were not being hosted by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, one of the few foreign leaders he has openly praised. The remarks suggest both Erdogan and Rutte may face an uphill task in keeping the summit focused on alliance unity. Traditionally, NATO's secretary-general, a role always held by a European, works to build consensus among member states and represent the alliance as a whole. However, during both of Trump's presidencies, Rutte and his predecessor, Jens Stoltenberg, have devoted much of their efforts to preventing the United States from distancing itself from NATO. Trump has repeatedly questioned America's commitment to the alliance. He has threatened to withdraw from NATO, suggested pulling US troops out of Europe, and raised doubts about defending allies that fail to spend enough on their militaries. He has also expressed interest in taking control of Greenland, a self-governing territory of NATO member Denmark. Rutte has responded with careful diplomacy and public praise for Trump. At the White House last month, he highlighted that increased European defense spending has created tens of thousands of American jobs and generated a $300 billion backlog of European military equipment orders from US manufacturers. Rutte also gently challenged Trump's claim that NATO had failed to support the US during its military operation against Iran, noting that up to 5,000 American aircraft had flown from bases in Europe before an April ceasefire. Meanwhile, NATO allies have become increasingly concerned after the Pentagon announced plans to reduce the number of US troops, warships, aircraft and drones available to defend Europe in the event of an attack. Trump has also given mixed signals about whether US troop levels in Europe will rise or fall. The uncertainty comes as Russia continues testing Europe's defenses. A study released Thursday said Moscow has increased drone activity near military bases across several European countries. NATO summits are traditionally designed to demonstrate the alliance's commitment to collective defense under Article 5, which states that an attack on one member is considered an attack on all. The clause has been invoked only once, after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States. Last year's summit in The Hague ended on a positive note after allies agreed to boost defense spending, with Trump describing NATO members as a "nice group of people." This year's gathering in Turkey is expected to be more difficult. Rutte has argued that Europe's increased defense investment allows the US to shift more attention toward security challenges posed by China while European allies take greater responsibility for supporting Ukraine. However, Trump's latest demand for greater "loyalty" from allies has added a new layer of uncertainty ahead of the summit. In his memoir, former NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg recalled that Trump nearly derailed the alliance's 2018 summit. "If an American president says he no longer wishes to defend the other allies and leaves a NATO summit in protest, then the NATO treaty and its security guarantee aren't worth very much," Stoltenberg wrote.

Republican senators are set to discuss the future of a controversial $1.8 billion settlement fund on Tuesday after the US Justice Department said it would follow a court order temporarily blocking the programme. Several Republican lawmakers, who had already voiced concerns about the fund before Congress recessed two weeks ago, say they want clearer answers from the Trump administration. The fund was created as part of a settlement linked to President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the disclosure of his tax returns. Critics within Trump’s own party worry that some of the money could be used to compensate individuals involved in the January 6, 2021 attack on the US Capitol. At the same time, Trump is reportedly reconsidering whether the fund should move ahead at all, according to a person familiar with the matter. The dispute has also delayed a Senate bill that would provide three years of funding for immigration enforcement agencies, including Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and the Border Patrol. Republicans postponed action on the bill after Democrats threatened amendments aimed at eliminating or reducing the settlement fund. Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday that it remains unclear whether the immigration funding package will advance this week. The controversy began after Trump announced the settlement fund without prior consultation with lawmakers. The announcement came while Congress was already debating immigration funding legislation that included an additional $1 billion for White House security projects. The move angered many Senate Republicans, who later removed the White House security funding from the bill and warned they would not support the legislation unless significant changes were made to the settlement plan. Thune said he believes the administration should consider shutting down the fund on its own and indicated senators would decide their next steps after a Republican conference meeting on Tuesday. Republican lawmakers said they need a stronger commitment from the administration before supporting any related legislation. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley said the president must clearly state that the fund will not be used in a way that could be politically motivated. Senators Jim Lankford and Lisa Murkowski also said they want an explicit assurance that the programme will be fully withdrawn. Meanwhile, John Kennedy warned that the immigration bill is unlikely to move forward without a resolution to the dispute. The Justice Department said it would comply with a ruling by US District Judge Leonie Brinkema, who last week temporarily suspended the fund for two weeks and scheduled a hearing on June 12 to consider extending the pause. Although the department said it strongly disagrees with the decision, senators from both sides of the debate insist they need more details about what the administration plans to do once the court order expires. The issue has become one of the most contentious disputes among Senate Republicans in recent months. According to Texas Senator Ted Cruz, a recent closed-door meeting with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was among the most heated he has witnessed during his time in the Senate. Republican lawmakers have discussed several options, including restricting who could receive payments, changing oversight of the fund, introducing judicial review of claims, or scrapping the programme entirely. The debate comes amid broader political tensions within the Republican Party as Trump continues to challenge GOP lawmakers he considers insufficiently loyal, creating additional uncertainty over support for his legislative agenda in the narrowly divided Senate.

The U.S. military said it carried out another strike on a boat suspected of drug trafficking in the eastern Pacific Ocean on Saturday, killing three men in what was the fourth such operation this week. The latest attack has pushed the total death toll from the campaign to 205. The U.S. Southern Command said the vessel was involved in drug-smuggling activities and was operated by a group designated as a terrorist organization. However, it did not provide any evidence to support the claim. The strike is part of an ongoing military campaign targeting suspected drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific that has been underway for several months. Video released by the military showed a small boat at sea before it was struck and burst into flames. According to U.S. officials, the latest operation followed similar strikes announced earlier this week on Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. The campaign began in early September and has now resulted in 205 deaths. The administration of U.S. President Donald Trump has described Latin American drug cartels as being in armed conflict with the United States, blaming them for the flow of illegal drugs into American communities. The Southern Command said the latest strike was ordered by Francis L. Donovan, the top U.S. military commander overseeing operations in Latin America.

The United States carried out fresh “defensive” strikes against Iran on Wednesday, as President Donald Trump claimed Tehran is “running out of options” in ongoing negotiations and said upcoming midterm elections will not pressure him into a quick deal. According to US officials, American forces intercepted and destroyed four Iranian one-way attack drones near the Strait of Hormuz, considering them a potential threat. The officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said US troops also targeted a drone control site in Bandar Abbas that was preparing to launch another drone. The latest military actions came as Trump expressed confidence during a Cabinet meeting that progress is being made toward ending the nearly three-month-long conflict, although negotiations remain uncertain. The president is aiming for an agreement that would reopen the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz and allow him to claim that Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been significantly reduced. Such an outcome could help him justify ending a war that has faced political criticism at home. However, the proposed deal leaves several key issues unresolved and has drawn criticism, even from some of Trump’s Republican allies. Critics argue that Iran’s leadership could emerge from the conflict weakened but still empowered. With midterm elections approaching and concerns growing over rising fuel prices and living costs, some Republicans worry about the political impact. But Trump dismissed suggestions that the elections would influence his decisions. “They thought they could wait me out because of the midterms,” Trump said. “I don’t care about the midterms.” He acknowledged that negotiations are still ongoing but remained optimistic. “They want a deal badly,” he said. “We’re not satisfied yet, but we will be or we’ll have to finish the job.” Earlier this week, the Pentagon confirmed similar “defensive” strikes targeting Iranian missile sites and boats suspected of laying naval mines. The US has said it is acting cautiously due to a fragile ceasefire that has been in place for weeks. Republican concerns over deal terms Despite Trump’s optimism, differences remain between Washington and Tehran on several major issues. Senior Republican lawmakers, including Senators Roger Wicker, Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz, have expressed concern that the deal may be too favorable to Iran. Some critics say the proposed agreement resembles the nuclear deal negotiated under former President Barack Obama  a deal Trump had previously withdrawn from.   Under the current proposal, Iran would give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. Officials say details on how the uranium would be handled are still under discussion, with options including dilution or transfer to a third country. However, Trump said he would not be comfortable with Russia or China taking control of Iran’s uranium stockpile. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran currently possesses about 440.9 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60% purity, close to weapons-grade levels. Iran has not publicly agreed to surrender this material. Uncertainty over Israel and Lebanon Another unresolved issue is whether the ceasefire would include Israel’s ongoing military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran has insisted that Lebanon be included in any agreement. The US proposal appears to leave room for interpretation, supporting a broader ceasefire while also recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against immediate threats. Clashes between Israeli forces and Hezbollah fighters continue in southern Lebanon, with Israeli troops advancing further north. Analysts warn that any sanctions relief could allow Iran to rebuild its military strength and support allied groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Push to expand Abraham Accords Trump has also called for expanding the Abraham Accords — agreements aimed at normalizing relations between Israel and several Muslim-majority countries — to include nations such as Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar and Pakistan. “We are strongly encouraging them to join,” Trump said. However, experts say this goal may be difficult to achieve. Saudi Arabia, for example, has maintained that recognition of Israel depends on a clear path toward establishing a Palestinian state — something Israel currently opposes. Trump raised the issue during recent talks with Middle Eastern leaders, though reactions reportedly varied. While some officials described the response as muted, others said certain allies showed interest in the proposal.

US President Donald Trump is set to meet his Cabinet on Wednesday at a critical point in ongoing efforts to end the conflict with Iran. This comes just days after he claimed that a settlement had been “largely negotiated,” even though discussions remain unsettled. Ahead of the meeting, Trump has expressed confidence that a deal is close. He hopes the agreement will help reopen the Strait of Hormuz and allow him to argue that Iran’s nuclear capabilities have been reduced enough to declare success. The conflict has been politically unpopular among Republicans, adding pressure for a resolution. However, there are concerns that any deal reached may fall short of expectations. Key issues have been left for later negotiations, and critics  including some of Trump’s supporters  fear Iran could emerge weakened but more determined. The situation is becoming more sensitive as US midterm elections approach, with Republicans worried about rising fuel prices and growing public dissatisfaction. Tensions increased further after US forces carried out what the Pentagon described as “defensive” strikes on missile sites and boats in southern Iran earlier this week. While Washington said the action was restrained, Iran criticized it as a sign of bad faith. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said negotiations on reopening the Strait of Hormuz and extending the ceasefire would take a few more days. He added that Trump would either secure a strong agreement or walk away without a deal. Meanwhile, Trump complained on social media that even a full surrender by Iran might still be portrayed by the media as a victory for Tehran. Concerns among allies Despite Trump’s optimism, major differences remain between the US and Iran. Some Republican leaders, including Senators Roger Wicker, Lindsey Graham and Ted Cruz, have voiced concern that the proposed terms may favor Iran too much. They argue that parts of the deal resemble the nuclear agreement reached under former President Barack Obama — a deal Trump had previously scrapped. Under the proposed agreement, Iran would give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium in exchange for relief from sanctions, according to officials familiar with the talks. However, details of how this would be done are still unclear and may be negotiated during a 60-day period. The International Atomic Energy Agency estimates that Iran currently possesses a significant amount of uranium enriched close to weapons-grade levels, though Tehran has not publicly agreed to surrender it. Trump recently suggested the uranium could be handed over to the US or destroyed under international supervision, signaling a softer stance compared to his earlier position. Impact on regional tensions Another unresolved issue is whether the ceasefire would include Israel’s ongoing operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Iran has insisted that Lebanon must be part of any broader agreement. The US proposal appears to allow flexibility, supporting a ceasefire while also recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself against threats. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated that military operations in Lebanon are continuing. Analysts warn that any sanctions relief could allow Iran to rebuild its military strength and support allied groups like Hezbollah and Hamas. Abraham Accords push faces hurdles Trump has also suggested expanding the Abraham Accords — agreements aimed at normalizing relations between Israel and several countries — as part of a broader deal. However, this proposal faces challenges. Key regional players like Saudi Arabia have said they would only consider such steps if there is clear progress toward establishing a Palestinian state, something Israel opposes. Reports suggest that Trump’s proposal received a muted response from some Middle Eastern leaders, although opinions appear divided. Despite concerns, US allies in the region continue to support efforts to end the conflict, seeing few alternatives to diplomacy.  

Details of a possible agreement between the United States and Iran are beginning to emerge after US President Donald Trump said negotiations aimed at easing tensions in the Middle East have made major progress. Trump said on Saturday that a deal had been “largely negotiated” following discussions with Israel and several key regional allies, including Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Pakistan, Turkey, Egypt, Jordan and Bahrain. He said the final details of the agreement were still under discussion and would be announced soon. However, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio urged caution, saying important progress had been made but the negotiations were not yet complete. Speaking during a visit to India, Rubio said he hoped there would be positive developments within hours. He added that one of Trump’s key goals was to remove fears over Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. According to two regional officials familiar with the talks, Iran has agreed not to pursue nuclear weapons and is prepared to give up its stockpile of highly enriched uranium as part of the proposed deal. One official said negotiations are continuing over how Iran’s enriched uranium would be handled during a 60-day process. Some of the uranium could be diluted, while the rest may be transferred to another country, possibly Russia. The International Atomic Energy Agency says Iran currently holds around 440 kilograms of uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity, close to weapons-grade level. The draft agreement could also lead to the gradual reopening of the Strait of Hormuz alongside the lifting of US restrictions on Iranian ports, one official said. Another official said the US may allow Iran to resume oil exports through sanctions waivers. Discussions on easing sanctions and releasing frozen Iranian funds are also expected during the 60-day negotiation period. Officials said the proposed deal also includes efforts to end the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah and commitments by regional countries not to interfere in each other’s domestic affairs. The negotiations come after months of tensions following US and Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, which killed senior Iranian officials and disrupted nuclear talks. Iran later launched attacks on Israel and neighboring countries hosting US military forces, increasing fears across Gulf nations. Although a ceasefire has been in place since April 7, concerns remain over Iran’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz, a critical route for global oil and gas shipments. Meanwhile, Israeli leaders remain concerned about the threat posed by Hezbollah, the Iran-backed armed group based in Lebanon. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reportedly told Trump that Israel would continue acting against security threats, including those linked to Lebanon. According to an Israeli official, Trump insisted that any final agreement must require Iran to fully dismantle its nuclear programme and remove all enriched uranium from the country. Israel’s Science and Technology Minister Gila Gamliel said the country was currently taking a “wait-and-see” approach regarding the negotiations. Despite a US-brokered ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, clashes have continued, with both sides exchanging attacks. Lebanese authorities say more than 3,000 people have been killed in the latest fighting, while Israel says several soldiers and civilians have also died in attacks linked to Hezbollah.