Middle East crisis live: Trump says Iran deal will be signed today but Tehran casts doubt on timing as Israel launches strikes on Beirut

Trump’s signing claim meets Iranian caution

Donald Trump said a U.S.-Iran deal could be signed on Sunday, June 14, as diplomacy over a reported memorandum continued to move quickly but without a final public agreement. Iranian officials immediately pushed back on the timing, saying the talks had not yet reached a signing stage and that the deal, if completed, would likely come later.

Pakistan’s prime minister, Shehbaz Sharif, also said the agreement was expected to be finalized within 24 hours and signed electronically. The competing public statements made the negotiations look close, but not yet settled, and underscored how much of the process was still being handled behind the scenes.

Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said the signing would not happen immediately and could come in the coming days. The Guardian separately reported that Iranian media said the deal was not yet finalized when Trump announced it would be signed on Sunday.

Qatari negotiators were reported to have traveled to Tehran on June 14 to help finalize the agreement. That suggested the diplomacy was still active even as the sides differed over how near they were to an actual signing.

What the draft appears to cover

The reported deal is being framed as a war-ending memorandum rather than a final settlement of the deeper nuclear dispute. AP reported that the draft would first address the Strait of Hormuz, a key issue because reopening it would ease pressure on global shipping and energy markets.

The broader nuclear questions and frozen funds would be left for later technical talks under a 60-day framework, according to the reporting. That means even a successful signing would still leave important details unresolved and subject to further negotiation.

The stakes are larger than the wording of one document. A signed memorandum could signal a limited diplomatic reset and reduce immediate pressure in the Gulf, but it would not by itself settle the core disputes between Washington and Tehran.

Beirut strikes deepen the risk

The diplomatic picture became more fragile after Israeli strikes hit Beirut’s southern suburbs on June 14. Israel said the attack followed Hezbollah projectiles fired into northern Israel, while Lebanon’s health ministry said at least three people were killed and 16 wounded.

Netanyahu’s office said the strikes were a response to Hezbollah attacks on northern Israel. Israeli forces also issued fresh evacuation warnings in southern Lebanon, adding to the sense that the confrontation with Hezbollah was widening rather than easing.

Trump urged restraint after the strike, saying the attack on Beirut should not have happened and warning against further attacks in Lebanon. Iranian officials, by contrast, said the strike would not go unanswered and warned that it could jeopardize the talks.

Those reactions made the Beirut operation more than a separate battlefield event. It now sits directly alongside the diplomacy, with the potential to slow or derail the timing of any signing if escalation continues.

A fast-moving timeline

The sequence over the last 48 hours shows how quickly the story has shifted. AP reported on June 13 that Trump and Pakistani officials were describing a deal as close enough to be signed soon, while Iran said more time was needed.

By June 14, The Guardian’s live coverage was adding Iranian timing doubts, reporting that Qatari negotiators had gone to Tehran and that Iranian figures were warning the Beirut strike would not go unanswered. Trump’s public comments still suggested a signing was imminent, but Tehran was signaling otherwise.

The latest check at 15:49 UTC on June 14 confirmed that the deal remained unsigned and that Beirut casualties were being reported. That leaves the central question unchanged: whether the signing goes ahead on June 14, slips into the next few days, or is pushed back by the fallout from the strikes.

What to watch next

The immediate watchpoints are whether U.S., Qatari, Pakistani and Iranian officials issue any new statements on the draft terms or the timing of a signing. Another key question is whether the talks are still being treated as viable after the Beirut strike, or whether the attack has altered the political calculation.

There is also the risk of more violence in Lebanon. Further Israeli strikes, new evacuation warnings, or retaliation from Hezbollah or Iran could all increase the pressure on the negotiations and widen the conflict.

The broader regional issue is whether any limited understanding on the Strait of Hormuz can survive the current escalation. If the diplomacy holds, it could ease one pressure point in the region; if it fails, the combination of unresolved negotiations and fighting in Lebanon could deepen instability quickly.