2026-06-18T20:11:14.125Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/secret-us-iran-proposals
- 消息人士称,美伊双方一直在制定秘密书面提案,以落实双方近期达成的14点谅解备忘录。
- 提案包含伊朗核计划的相关细节,但伊朗尚未在该谅解备忘录之外签署任何其他文件。
- 批评人士表示,此次秘密谈判效仿了奥巴马时期的做法,而特朗普曾批评这种做法是与伊朗达成的秘密附加协议。
本文由AI生成摘要,经CNN编辑审核。
据三名熟悉谈判情况的美国官员、一名地区官员和一名前美国官员透露,美伊双方一直在制定落实本周签署的14点协议的秘密提案,其中包括如何处理伊朗核计划未来的细节。
周四,美国副总统J·D·万斯在回应CNN的提问时表示,政府官员所称的与伊朗达成的、超出谅解备忘录范畴的“君子协定”中,至少有一部分是书面协议。
但消息人士强调,这些提案远未最终敲定。伊朗并未像签署14点谅解备忘录那样签署任何额外文件,这引发了人们的质疑:拜登政府是否夸大了其从伊朗获得的承诺,也进一步凸显了达成最终协议的脆弱政治努力可能会迅速破裂。
万斯表示:“其中一些内容已经形成书面文件,但从根本上说,无论是否形成文字,这就是我们设计这项协议的原因——因为我们不相信口头承诺,我们相信行动和行为。我们将奖励符合规范的行为,而不会奖励任何口头承诺,无论这些承诺是否写在纸上。”
据一位熟悉特朗普政府向国会核心议员汇报情况的消息人士透露,美国谈判代表选择公布已签署的谅解备忘录,而没有等待伊朗高级领导层签署落实14点协议的更详细提案,部分原因是他们不想推迟下一阶段的谈判。
该消息人士称,要让伊朗正式批准这些仍处于保密状态的提案需要更多时间,因此美方决定先公布已签署的谅解备忘录,并在后续谈判中敲定其余细节。
尽管特朗普政府官员告诉议员们,他们不知道有任何与谅解备忘录相关的“附加协议”,但他们确实承认存在一些尚未公开的相关文件——其中包括“伊朗政府的一封信”,邀请国际原子能机构总干事开展核查工作,着手查明浓缩铀的存放地点,并批准该国际机构邀请美国核专家参与相关进程,该消息人士补充道。
CNN已就这封信征求伊朗驻联合国代表团的置评。
CNN未能了解到工作提案的许多具体内容。这位地区官员将提案的书面部分描述为“工作文件”,双方已同意将其作为下一步工作进行正式敲定。消息人士称,这些提案包含了美国谈判代表为推进伊朗核计划等问题谈判所追求的更具体内容。为期60天的技术会谈定于周四开始。
白宫发言人奥利维亚·威尔士在给CNN的一份声明中表示:“双方正在讨论后续步骤,但除谅解备忘录外,尚未达成任何最终协议。美国谈判团队希望在即将到来的会谈中达成更多协议。”
但这些秘密提案的存在,凸显出美国谈判代表为达成一项能让双方至少在公开场合宣称取得胜利的协议,所面临的极其狭窄的周旋空间——这也凸显出双方可能永远无法达成超出谅解备忘录相对模糊条款的协议。
这也可能为唐纳德·特朗普总统伊朗政策的批评者提供更多弹药,表明他正在做2015年奥巴马总统曾做过的、特朗普当时抨击的事情——当时奥巴马达成了最初的核协议,特朗普在2018年将其废除。当时,共和党人抨击所谓的“秘密附加协议”。国会甚至通过了一项法律,要求任何与伊朗的核协议,包括任何附加协议或口头谅解,都必须提交国会。
据消息人士透露,附加提案中包含了关于伊朗是否被允许继续以任何级别浓缩铀的相互谅解——这不仅是最初谈判期间技术层面的关键争议点,也是围绕该协议的国内争端中最具争议的政治问题之一。
特朗普政府官员辩称,谅解备忘录及其相关的“君子协定”是“基于行动的”,旨在仅因伊朗的良好行为而给予奖励;批评人士则表示,该协议让伊朗立即获得制裁 relief 等好处,却未就其核计划或其他美国优先事项做出任何可执行的让步。
军备控制专家杰弗里·刘易斯指出,将提案保密的决定几乎肯定是为了避免双方在国内政治上陷入尴尬,以推动协议达成。他表示,任何潜在协议可能涉及的相关技术信息,在2015年奥巴马与伊朗达成的最初核协议框架下就已公开。
刘易斯说:“没有任何国家安全理由要保密在《联合全面行动计划》(JCPOA)下已经公开的信息。魔鬼藏在细节中,而有人不想让我们看到其中一个魔鬼。”
一位美国高级官员周三表示:“我们希望这项协议的座右铭是‘没有附加协议,完全透明’。”
特朗普对任何暗示他与伊朗达成的临时协议与2015年奥巴马协议有相似之处的说法格外敏感。
周日,特朗普在Truth Social的帖子中写道:“奥巴马协议是伊朗获取核武器、获取现金的道路,是美国有史以来最糟糕、最愚蠢(因此是民主党!)的协议之一。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。”
2018年,美国退出该协议时,特朗普在一次演讲中称该协议“解除了对伊朗的严厉经济制裁,仅换取对该政权核活动的极其薄弱的限制”。
但至少到目前为止,特朗普实际上并未与伊朗达成核协议。据这位地区官员和其中一名美国官员透露,这些“君子协定”式的提案尚未签署。
刘易斯说,2015年,谈判代表找到了“让双方都宣称取得胜利的非凡技术解决方案。能够找到谈判空间本身就令人惊叹”。
如果无法公开获取提案中列出的谈判参数,就不清楚特朗普将如何找到与2015年奥巴马达成的协议有实质区别的平衡点。
谈判代表有可能永远无法达成最终协议——更不用说在谅解备忘录规定的60天期限内了。谅解备忘录的主要功能可能只是停止伊朗境内的敌对行动,而非为达成核协议创造条件的更宏大目标。
双方都在与对方打交道时划定了坚定的公开红线,因此任何有意义的妥协现在可能都遥不可及——或者,正如刘易斯所暗示的那样,妥协在国内政治上代价太高,无法公开。
如果谈判代表希望达成最终协议,“总得有人低头妥协”,他说。“这也就解释了为什么你想要将其列为机密。”
Secret US-Iran proposals reveal fragile path toward broader nuclear deal
2026-06-18T20:11:14.125Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/18/politics/secret-us-iran-proposals
- The US and Iran have been developing secret written proposals to implement their recent 14-point memorandum of understanding, sources say.
- The proposals include details on Iran’s nuclear program, but Iran has not signed any additional documents beyond the original MOU.
- Critics say the secret negotiations mirror the Obama-era approach that Trump once criticized as secret side deals with Iran.
AI-generated summary was reviewed by a CNN editor.
The US and Iran have been working on laying out secret proposals for implementing the 14 points that were signed this week, including details on how to address the future of Iran’s nuclear program, according to three US officials familiar with the negotiations, a regional official, and one former US official.
In response to a question from CNN on Thursday, Vice President JD Vance indicated that at least some of what administration officials have been calling “gentleman’s agreements” with Iran that go beyond the memorandum of understanding are written agreements.
But the sources emphasized that they are far from final. Iran has not signed any additional documents, as it did the 14-point memorandum of understanding, raising questions about whether the administration has overstated the commitments it has extracted from Iran and further emphasizing how quickly the fragile political effort to reach a final deal could fall apart.
“Some of them are written down, but fundamentally, whether they’re written down or spoken, this is why we structured the deal that we did, because we don’t trust words, we trust action, and we trust conduct, and so we’re going to reward conduct, and we’re not going to reward any words, whether they’re written on a sheet of paper or not,” Vance said.
US negotiators opted to move forward with releasing the signed MOU, without waiting for Iran’s senior leadership to sign off on the more detailed proposals on how to implement the 14 points, in part, because they did not want to delay the next phase of negotiations, according to one of the sources who is familiar with what Trump officials briefed to top congressional lawmakers.
It would have required additional time to secure Iran’s formal sign off on those still-secret proposals, so the US side decided to move forward with just releasing the signed MOU and working through the rest of the details during subsequent talks, the source said.
While the Trump officials told lawmakers they are not aware of any “side deals” related to the MOU, they did acknowledge that there are some relevant documents that have not been publicly released — including a “letter from the Iranian government” inviting the head of the IAEA to conduct inspections, begin work on uncovering where the enriched material is located and giving the international agency approval to invite American nuclear experts to join the process, the source added.
CNN asked the Iranian mission to the UN for comment on the letter.
CNN was unable to learn many details of the contents of the working proposals. The regional official described the written-down portions of the proposals as “working” documents that both sides have agreed to formalize as a next step. The sources said they include more specifics on what US negotiators are pursuing as the way forward for talks on Iran’s nuclear program, among other issues. A 60-day period of technical talks is slated to begin on Thursday.
“There are discussions on next steps but there are no finalized agreements beyond the MOU, and the U.S. negotiating team hopes to reach more agreements in the upcoming talks,” White House spokeswoman Olivia Wales said in a statement to CNN.
But the mere existence of these secret proposals highlights the incredibly narrow path of maneuver that US negotiators have to reach a deal that will allow both sides, at least publicly, to claim victory — underscoring the possibility that the two sides may never be able to reach an agreement that goes beyond the relatively vague terms of the MOU.
It may also offer critics of President Donald Trump’s Iran strategy further ammunition to suggest he is doing exactly what he railed against then-President Barack Obama for doing in 2015, when Obama struck the original nuclear deal that Trump tore up in 2018. At the time, Republicans railed against what they termed “secret side deals.” Congress even passed a law requiring any nuclear agreement with Iran, including any side deal or spoken understanding, be submitted to the Hill.
Included in the auxiliary proposals is some mutual understanding around the question of whether Iran will be allowed to continue to enrich uranium at any level, according to the sources — a key point of not only technical contention during the original negotiations but among the most controversial political issues in the domestic imbroglio surrounding the deal.
Trump officials have argued that the MOU and the associated “gentleman’s agreements” surrounding it are “performance-based,” designed only to reward Iran for good behavior; critics have said that it provides Iran immediate benefits in the form of sanctions relief without any enforceable agreement on concessions on its nuclear program or other US priorities.
The decision to keep the proposals secret is almost certainly aimed at avoiding domestic political embarrassment for either side in the service of allowing a deal to go forward, noted arms control expert Jeffrey Lewis. Much of the relevant technical information that any potential deal might contemplate was already made public under the original nuclear deal President Barack Obama struck with Iran in 2015, he said.
“There is no national security reason to keep secret the kind of information that was public under the JCPOA,” Lewis said. “The devil is in the details and somebody does not want us to see one of the devils.”
A senior US official on Wednesday said that “the motto that we want to have with this deal is no side deals, full transparency.”
Trump has been particularly sensitive to any suggestion that the tentative deal he has struck with Iran bears any comparison to the 2015 Obama deal.
“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.,” Trump said in a Truth Social post on Sunday. “Our Deal is a WALL against Iran ever having a Nuclear weapon, the complete opposite of Obuma.”
In 2018, when he withdrew the United States from that agreement, he said in a speech that it “lifted crippling economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for very weak limits on the regime’s nuclear activity.”
But at least so far, Trump has not, in fact, reached a nuclear agreement with Iran. The proposals –- the “gentleman’s agreements” — have yet to be signed, according to the regional source and one of the US officials.
In 2015, Lewis said, negotiators found “extraordinary technical solutions to let both parties claim victory. It was remarkable that there was any trade space to be found.”
Without public access to the negotiating parameters laid out in the proposals, it’s not clear how Trump will be able to thread the same needle that will be substantively different than the agreement Obama struck in 2015.
It’s possible that negotiators are never able to reach a final agreement — much less in the 60-day period stipulated by the MOU. The primary function of the MOU may simply be the cessation of hostilities in Iran, rather than fulfilling any grander ambitions of setting the conditions for a nuclear deal.
Both sides have drawn such firm public red lines around dealing with the other that any meaningful compromise may now be out of reach — or, Lewis suggested, too politically damaging domestically to make public.
If negotiators want to reach a final deal, “Someone has to eat shit,” he said. “Which makes sense why you would want to classify.”
发表回复