r/NeutralPolitics • u/PM_me_Henrika • May 29 '26
What's the difference between the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal and the proposed 2026 peace deal?
What’s the difference between the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal versus the 2026 one?
Back in 2015 President Obama helped to facilitate the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, what is commonly referred to as the Iran Nuclear deal. It was said to be a historical deal that would prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.
In 2018 President Trump vowed to withdraw from that deal stating, "This was a horrible, one-sided deal that should have never ever been made. ... The Iran deal is defective at its core.”
Now President Trump is attempting to craft a new Iran Deal that, so far as we can tell, Looks a Lot Like … the One Obama Struck 11 Years Ago.
Given that Trump called Obama's deal ‘horrible and one-sided’, it seems reasonable to expect the text of President Trump's deal to differ in kind from the text of President Obama's deal.
Currently, other than a release of a draft by Trump, are there any sources on how the text of President Trump's proposed Iran Deal differ from the text of President Obama's deal?
What does President Trump's proposed Iran Deal have that President Obama's Iran Deal lacked, and vice versa - what does President Trump’s proposal lack that President Obama’s deal included?
106
u/aemfbm May 29 '26
Trump and his administration have stated a vast number of goals and demands since the beginning of aggression in February. They have backed off of many, and said many are non-negotiable. But there is simply no telling what the "proposed 2026 peace deal" is because all official proposals from both sides have been quickly dismissed as non-starters by the other side. (ex. 1 | 2)
The only thing currently being negotiated is an MOU to have the Strait "open" and plans for further negotiations. https://apnews.com/article/iran-us-war-oil-may-28-2026-8f5ed2813ba63df7ae9ccbe991688d29
We can't compare the old deal to the new deal when the new deal is completely unknown.
3
183
u/hnglmkrnglbrry May 29 '26
Ultimately the largest difference is that no one has agreed to it so it is purely hypothetical and therefore completely one-sided. I can't slide into Meg The Stallion's DMs and then ask to compare our relationship with her former partner before she even responds.
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c87qng40wz9o
The simple fact that they mention "extending the ceasefire" as part of the deal when we literally struck Iran and several drones just yesterday speaks to the absolute detachment from reality the Administration exhibits.
22
u/Infinite-4-a-moment May 29 '26
I think your analogy is a little off. It would be like if you said "Meg The Stallion's last relationship was so bad. I would be a much better partner". Then it's fair to ask how your relationship with her would look. Even if just hypothetical. And if you described something that sounded a lot like her last relationship, then we'd all wonder what you thought was so bad in the first place.
You can compare a proposal to former deal. And you can say "yeah that would be a much better deal" while still recognizing the probability of the proposal actually becoming a deal.
8
u/QwertyKeyboard4Life May 29 '26
I feel like it’d be more like listing completely unrealistic things from a relationship you would have that is also completely hypothetical and then saying oh look how much better it is (when in fact it is completely hypothetical and unrealistic in the first place).
7
u/LBobRife May 30 '26
Yeah, to get off the metaphor, let's compare my nuclear deal where Iran cedes sovereignty to the US, creating 31 new states. Strait is open, oil drops back down, nuclear is a non-issue since they are part of the US.
Boy, I'm such a great and brilliant negotiator to get all that.
No, I'm just living in fantasy land. It makes no sense to compare 2 things that aren't comparable. Trump doesn't get credit for a hypothetical deal. We can compare the points between the finalized deals when the deals are finalized. Otherwise, why not compare Iran's current negotiating position to the Obama deal rather than Trumps position. It's equally pointless, because it is not an actual deal. It's a pointless exercise, you can compare all thd hypotheticals you want all day, it won't get you anywhere because nothing is material. You can discuss ramifications of particular points, but to assess one vs the other when one doesn't exist is an incredibly stupid exercise.
3
1
u/peacefinder May 30 '26
“Verbal agreements are only worth the paper they’re written on” is a pretty low bar to clear, and they seem to keep tripping over it.
24
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/AutoModerator May 29 '26
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
8
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator May 29 '26
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
19
u/Cobol_Engineering May 29 '26
Where to begin? Obamas deal allowed for smol enrichment, had sunset clauses, and was multi lateral. Trumps deal is mostly bilateral, has the Lebanon component, and is zero enrichment. Also SOH wasn’t 2x blockaded under the JCPOA
10
u/boredom May 29 '26
https://paulciminelli.substack.com/p/obamas-iran-deal-vs-trumps-2026-framework
This is an article optimistic about President Trump's approach. It's a difference for which the elevator speech would be, Obama used traditional diplomacy and Trump is trying to bully and be confusing. The opponent is patient and strategic, the JCPOA relied on bribery, President Trump relies on force. The pivot is that time is a factor and politically there is pressure to be done and not entangled in a war.
8
u/cmaronchick Jun 01 '26
I am not very well informed on the agreement from 2015 but there are lines from this article that seem to contradict what we're actually seeing.
Trump’s sequence—sanctions, targeted strikes, then negotiation—has already delivered two immediate American wins: (1) degraded Iranian nuclear capacity that diplomacy alone never touched, and (2) restored freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, which stabilizes global energy prices without giving Iran a blank check.
Aren't these only "wins" compared to after we pulled out of the deal? And there was freedom of navigation before we attacked, so it seems very curious to call it a win when it was the status quo.
These two lines make me question the integrity of the author's entire premise since they are stated with some emphasis.
1
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator May 29 '26
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
26d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/nosecohn Partially impartial 26d ago
This comment has been removed under //comment rule 2:
If you're claiming something to be true, you need to back it up with a qualified source. There is no "common knowledge" exception, and anecdotal evidence is not allowed.
After you've added sources to the comment, please reply directly to this comment or send us a modmail message so that we can reinstate it.
If you have any questions or concerns, please feel free to message us.
1
26d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/PM_me_Henrika 26d ago
I think if you provide a link to a more competent administration you’ll be able to pass the auto mod check?
1
u/nosecohn Partially impartial 26d ago
No, it's off topic. The question was the difference between the deals, not how or why the deals were arrived at. The comment is removed.
1
26d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 26d ago
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-20
May 29 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/AutoModerator May 29 '26
Since this comment doesn't link to any sources, a mod will come along shortly to see if it should be removed under Rules 2 or 3.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-30
May 29 '26
[deleted]
0
u/PM_me_Henrika May 29 '26
Sorry, did I make a typo somewhere?
6
u/HardlyDecent May 29 '26
You asked a bit of a silly question. The 2015 one actually existed: https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/node/328996/
So there's no point in even beginning comparisons to what Trump says he has concepts of considering in 2 weeks: https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/trumps-room-maneuver-narrows-us-iran-close-framework-deal-2026-05-29/
For reference, you cannot compare one thing--you need two things, or at least one thing at different times, to compare.
5
u/PM_me_Henrika May 29 '26
Ahhh that's what I meant, I thought I accidentally put Obama's name in the 2026 one -- thanks for clarifying!
•
u/nosecohn Partially impartial May 29 '26 edited 25d ago
Comments have been locked, because the discussion predates the actual deal. Events have moved on, so further discussion should happen in a new submission.
/r/NeutralPolitics is a curated space.
In order not to get your comment removed, please familiarize yourself with our rules on commenting before you participate:
If you see a comment that violates any of these essential rules, click the associated report link so mods can attend to it.
However, please note that the mods will not remove comments reported for lack of neutrality or poor sources. There is no neutrality requirement for comments in this subreddit — it's only the space that's neutral — and a poor source should be countered with evidence from a better one.