2026-06-15T21:39:07.401Z / 美国有线电视新闻网（CNN）
唐纳德·特朗普总统承诺，他的伊朗协议将超越巴拉克·奥巴马总统2015年的核协议。
这份新的谅解备忘录将停止敌对行动，并重新开放霍尔木兹海峡，为谈判争取60天时间。
奥巴马曾预测，特朗普最终达成的协议与他第一任期内特朗普废弃的那份协议不会有太大差异。
本文由AI生成摘要，并经CNN编辑审核。
本篇报道曾刊登于CNN的《重要事项》新闻简报。如需将其发送至您的收件箱，请点击此处免费订阅。
唐纳德·特朗普总统就结束他与伊朗发动的战争的协议做出了几项保证。
这些保证主要包含两点核心内容：
- 它将确保伊朗永远无法拥有核武器
- 特朗普的协议将比巴拉克·奥巴马总统的协议更好
特朗普反复强调第二点。
以下是他周日在其社交媒体平台上发布的内容：
“奥巴马协议是伊朗通往核武器的道路，还附带现金，是美国有史以来达成的最糟糕、最愚蠢的协议（民主党人也因此愚蠢！）。我们的协议是一道屏障，阻止伊朗永远拥有核武器，与奥巴马协议完全相反。”
对奥巴马和民主党党名的拼写错误似乎是特朗普有意为之的抨击。他所提及的这份协议——正式名称为《联合全面行动计划》（JCPOA）——是伊朗与美国、欧盟、中国、俄罗斯、法国、英国和德国于2015年7月谈判并签署的。
当被问及周一公众何时能看到尚未公布的美伊协议文本时，特朗普直接提及了奥巴马。
“这不像奥巴马的那份文件，那简直是一份糟糕透顶的文件，”特朗普在访问法国期间与法国总统埃马纽埃尔·马克龙同坐时说道，“这是一份非常有力的文件，我希望将其公布。所以可能很快就会发布。”
最近几周，奥巴马也被要求将自己的伊朗政策与特朗普的进行比较。奥巴马的预测是，无论特朗普达成何种协议，都将与特朗普在第一任期内撕毁的《联合全面行动计划》非常相似。
“任何最终达成的协议都不太可能与我们最初达成的协议有显著不同，或是得到显著改善，”奥巴马在周一播出的接受美国广播公司记者罗宾·罗伯茨采访时说道。
奥巴马借此批评特朗普浮夸的外交政策，并表示本可以通过外交手段实现同样的目标。
“那种认为我们可以通过威胁或轰炸来解决问题的想法有时似乎很有吸引力，但事实是，花时间探索外交途径，穷尽一切可能达成无法解决100%问题，但能解决80%、90%问题的协议，同时避免开战的必要性，”奥巴马说，“你会认为我们到现在已经吸取了这个教训，但似乎我们每隔一段时间就不得不重新学习一次。”
周日宣布的协议尚未公开，因此无法确切说明它与《联合全面行动计划》相比具体如何。一个参考点是，《联合全面行动计划》是一份长达18页的详细协议——点击此处阅读。特朗普的协议是一份“谅解备忘录”，“大约一页半”，副总统JD·万斯周一告诉CNN记者杰克·塔珀。
更重要的是，新的谅解备忘录并非一项长期核协议，而是一项停止敌对行动、开展60天谈判的协议。谈判可能会达成一项长期协议，但并无保障。
最后，由于奥巴马时期的《联合全面行动计划》实际上是伊朗与包括美国在内的多个国家达成的协议，且所处时代截然不同，因此很难进行比较。
2015年，伊朗同意限制其核计划。国际监督机构证实伊朗正在遵守协议，伊朗得以动用其石油财富。
特朗普于2018年退出《联合全面行动计划》。伊朗随后也退出了该协议，并重启了铀浓缩活动。
因此，特朗普达成的任何有效协议都必然要包含以下两项内容之一：降低伊朗在《联合全面行动计划》失效后浓缩的铀的等级，或将这些铀运出伊朗。特朗普曾谈到需要清除“核尘埃”。
伊朗获得了新的谈判筹码，即霍尔木兹海峡的油轮运输。阻碍全球石油供应并非《联合全面行动计划》签署国与伊朗之间谈判的内容。
与奥巴马达成的多边国际长期协议不同，新协议将停止两国间的敌对行动并重新开放霍尔木兹海峡。据报道，美国将停止对伊朗港口的封锁，伊朗将允许航运船只通过该海峡。
万斯在美国与伊朗达成协议的过程中发挥了主导作用，显然也将作为美国官员于周五在瑞士日内瓦签署该协议。他周一在CNBC的采访中透露了更多有关伊朗协议的细节。
他表示，美国将采取两步流程，核实伊朗是否放弃其核计划，以换取被允许动用其石油财富并融入世界经济。
“这基本上就是两步流程，也是伊朗必须做出的选择，”万斯说，“他们想要进入世界经济吗？如果想，他们就必须放弃长期的核野心。”
他补充称，美国已经基本摧毁了伊朗的核能力。
根据该协议，美国将允许伊朗获得资金，这在某种程度上有些尴尬，因为特朗普经常抱怨——且歪曲事实——奥巴马时期的协议解除了对伊朗的部分制裁，使该国得以获得数十亿美元，以换取限制其核计划。
特朗普的协议也必须做到这一点，以诱惑伊朗限制或放弃其核计划，以换取制裁解除。伊朗领导人表示，在临时协议启动后的60天谈判期内，他们可能获得240亿美元的资金。
万斯周日在接受CBS新闻采访时否认了这一数字的准确性，但他承认，一项更大规模的协议可能会为该政权带来更多数十亿美元的资金。伊朗和美国官员在解冻资产的问题上似乎存在分歧。无论如何，伊朗都希望解冻数十亿美元的资金。
“我们已经表明，我们愿意讨论解冻资产的问题，但前提是他们对核计划做出长期承诺，那么更大规模的协议就是解除其经济制裁，”万斯说。
但同样，由于当前的协议只是一项再谈判60天的协议，任何比较都为时过早。
“它实际上并没有解决任何问题，”前美国驻北约大使库尔特·沃尔克周一在CNN节目中表示，“这只是一份临时谅解备忘录，为新的谈判铺平道路。”
沃尔克对即将到来的谈判做出了预测。
“伊朗将非常努力地试图保留其铀浓缩计划，储存浓缩铀，”他说，并补充道，“他们还希望在未来对霍尔木兹海峡主张某种控制权。”
沃尔克表示，存在改进《联合全面行动计划》的方法，包括更好地限制伊朗的铀浓缩权利，以及建立一个更好的系统，让国际原子能机构（IAEA）核实伊朗是否遵守不研发核武器的承诺。
沃尔克说，这些都是值得关注的细节。
“但我怀疑我们离这一步还很远。我们现在听到的一切都只是他们承诺不会拥有核武器，这也是他们一直以来的说法。所以我不确定我们目前看到了多少不同之处，”他说。
Trump promises a better Iran deal than Obama’s. Here’s what we know
2026-06-15T21:39:07.401Z / CNN
President Donald Trump promises his Iran deal will surpass President Barack Obama’s 2015 nuclear agreement.
The new memorandum of understanding halts hostilities and reopens the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days of negotiations.
Obama predicted Trump’s eventual agreement would not differ significantly from the deal Trump abandoned in his first term.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
A version of this story appeared in CNN’s What Matters newsletter. To get it in your inbox, sign up for free here.
President Donald Trump has made a few guarantees about a deal to end the war he started with Iran.
They frequently include two main points:
- It will ensure that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon
- Trump’s deal will be better than President Barack Obama’s
Trump keeps coming back to that that second point.
Here he is in a post on his social media platform Sunday:
“The Obuma Deal was a road to a Nuclear weapon for Iran, cash and all, one of the worst and dumbest (hence Dumocrats!) Deals ever made by the U.S. Our Deal is a WALL against Iran ever having a Nuclear weapon, the complete opposite of Obuma.”
The misspellings of Obama’s name and the Democratic Party appear to be intentional digs by Trump. And the deal he’s referring to — technically called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA — was negotiated and signed in July of 2015 by Iran with the US, the European Union, China, Russia, France, the United Kingdom and Germany.
Asked Monday when the public might see text of his agreement with Iran, which has not yet been released, Trump went straight back to Obama.
“It’s not like the Obama document, which was just a terrible document,” Trump said, sitting alongside French President Emmanuel Macron during a trip to France. “This is a very powerful document, and I want it to be released. So probably pretty soon.”
Obama has also been asked in recent weeks to compare his own Iran efforts with Trump’s. The prediction from Obama is that whatever Trump achieves will be very similar to the JCPOA, which Trump tore up in his first term.
“It is doubtful that any agreement that arises is going to be significantly different or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place,” Obama told ABC’s Robin Roberts in an interview that aired Monday.
Obama used that comparison to criticize Trump’s bombastic foreign policy and said the same ends could have been accomplished through diplomacy.
“The notion that we can just bully our way or bomb our way to solutions may sometimes seem appealing, but the fact of the matter is, is that taking the time to explore diplomacy and exhaust the possibilities of coming up with deals that don’t solve 100% of the problem, but solve 80, 90% of the problem, while avoiding the necessity of going to war,” Obama said. “You’d think we would have learned that lesson by now, but it seems like every so often we have to relearn that lesson again.”
The agreement announced Sunday has not yet been publicly released, so it is impossible to say how exactly it stacks up against the JCPOA. One indicator is that the JCPOA was a detailed, 18-page agreement – read it here. Trump’s agreement, a “memorandum of understanding,” is “about a page and a half,” Vice President JD Vance told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Monday.
More importantly, the new MOU is not a long-term nuclear deal, but rather an agreement to halt the war and negotiate for 60 days. A longer-term agreement could result from those negotiations, but is not guaranteed.
And finally, it’s hard to draw comparisons since the Obama JCPOA — which was actually a deal between Iran and a large group of countries including the US — is from a much different time.
Back in 2015, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear program. International monitors verified that Iran was complying and Iran was able to tap its oil wealth.
Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA in 2018. Iran subsequently also withdrew from the agreement and then kickstarted its enrichment of uranium.
So any part of a successful Trump deal would necessarily include either the downgrading of uranium Iran enriched after the JCPOA’s demise or the taking of that uranium out of Iran. Trump has talked about the need to remove the “nuclear dust.”
Iran has gained a new bargaining chip, which is tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. Choking the world’s oil supply was not part of negotiations between Iran and signatories of the JCPOA.
Rather than a multilateral international and long-term agreement like the one Obama entered into, the new agreement would stop hostilities between the countries and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. The US will reportedly stop its blockade of Iranian ports, and Iran will allow shipping traffic through the strait.
Vance, who has taken a lead role for the US on reaching the deal with Iran and will apparently be the US official on hand to sign it in Geneva, Switzerland, on Friday, gave more details on the Iran deal during an interview on CNBC Monday.
He said there would be a two-step process by which the US would verify that Iran had abandoned its nuclear program in exchange for being allowed to tap into its oil wealth and join the world economy.
“That’s fundamentally the two-step process, the choice the Iranians have to make,” Vance said. “Do they want access to the world economy? If so, they’re going to have to give up the long-term nuclear ambition.”
He added that the US has already largely destroyed Iran’s nuclear capabilities.
The US end of that agreement is to allow Iran access to money, which will be sort of awkward since Trump frequently complains – and misstates facts – about the truth that the Obama-era deal gave lifted some sanctions on Iran, giving the country access to billions of dollars in exchange for limiting its nuclear program.
A Trump deal would have to do the same, enticing Iran to limit or abandon its nuclear program in exchange for lifting sanctions. Iranian leaders have said they could get access to $24 billion during the 60-day negotiating period the interim deal would kick off.
Vance denied that figure is accurate during an interview with CBS News on Sunday, but he acknowledged that a larger agreement could mean many more billions for the regime. There appears to be some disagreement between Iranian and US officials over the unfrozen assets. In any event, Iran wants to unlock billions of dollars.
“What we have said is that we’re willing to talk about unfreezing assets, but a much, much bigger deal is unsanctioning their economy — so long as they make the long-term commitments on the nuclear program,” Vance said.
But again, any comparisons are premature since the current agreement is an agreement to talk for another 60 days.
“It doesn’t actually resolve anything,” said Kurt Volker, the former US ambassador to NATO, during an appearance Monday on CNN. “It’s a temporary memorandum of understanding to set the stage for new negotiations.”
Volker made predictions for the coming negotiations.
“Iran is going to very strenuously try to cling to a nuclear enrichment program, to storage of enriched uranium,” he said, adding, “And they want to assert some kind of control over the Strait of Hormuz going forward.”
There are ways to improve upon the JCPOA, Volker said, including better limits on Iran’s right to enrich uranium and a better system by which the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, verifies that Iran is living up to its commitments not to pursue a nuclear weapon.
Those are details to watch, Volker said.
“But I suspect that we’re nowhere near there. All we’re hearing right now is that they’re committing not to have a nuclear weapon, which is what they’ve said all along. So I’m not sure that we’ve seen much (that’s) different yet,” he said.