US x Iran permanent peace deal by July 31, 2026?

As of May 19, 2026, there is only a ceasefire and its extensions between the US and Iran, and no permanent peace agreement meeting the market definition: the two-week ceasefire announced on April 7 was extended by Trump on April 21 and then extended indefinitely, and the rules explicitly exclude such ceasefire extensions. Although the White House confirmed that negotiators from both sides had reached agreement on a memorandum of understanding (MoU), it still required Trump's approval; Trump expressed dissatisfaction, his final decision meeting ended without a decision, and he publicly called Iran's response to the proposal 'TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE' and the ceasefire 'unbelievably weak.' In mid-May, negotiations were reported as stalled, Trump warned 'time is running out' and reiterated bombing threats; Iran also stated it had not reached agreement with the US on uranium enrichment terms. According to the judgment criteria, there must be a written agreement clearly stating that military hostilities have ended or will permanently cease, or clear public confirmation from both governments; as of the cutoff point, neither has appeared. With about 10 weeks until the July 31 deadline, neither side's top leadership has approved, core differences (uranium enrichment, Strait of Hormuz, US military deployment) remain, and framework arrangements that merely postpone key issues do not count. Therefore, 'No' is slightly favored, but 'Yes' still retains a considerable probability.

I choose NO. As of 00:00:08Z on May 19, 2026, the diplomatic process is still ongoing, and Trump has just postponed the attack due to Gulf state mediation, so reaching an agreement within the next approximately ten weeks is not a low-probability event. However, the US side still considered Iran's revised plan to have only symbolic improvements, and the two sides have not yet directly negotiated the substance of the agreement; core conditions such as nuclear enrichment and highly enriched uranium, sanctions and frozen assets, war reparations, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Lebanon conflict remain significantly apart. The market requires a clear, permanent termination of military hostilities, not a continuation of temporary ceasefires. Combining the positive diplomatic signals at the cutoff point with the strict resolution threshold, I estimate YES at 41% and NO at 59%.

As of May 19, 2026, there is only a fragile temporary ceasefire reached around April 8 between the US and Iran (initially two weeks, later unilaterally extended indefinitely by the US), but the ceasefire has been described by Trump as being in a 'life support' state. Since May, there have been intermittent exchanges of fire near the Strait of Hormuz, with the US blockade of Iranian ports coexisting with Iran's de facto control of shipping. After the direct talks in Islamabad on April 11-12 broke down over the nuclear issue, the two sides have mainly exchanged drafts through intermediaries such as Pakistan. Trump said on May 5 that there was progress, but on May 10 he rejected Iran's proposal as 'completely unacceptable'. Core differences (Iran's uranium enrichment/stockpile, ballistic missiles, proxy forces especially Hezbollah in Lebanon, sanctions relief, strait passage rights) remain sharp, and historical negotiations have failed many times. A permanent peace agreement requires a written agreement or formal confirmation by both sides that clearly and permanently ends military hostilities, not a temporary ceasefire extension, and the likelihood of reaching one in about two and a half months is low.

As of May 19, 2026, the US and Iran only maintain a temporary extension of the two-week ceasefire, and core differences (uranium enrichment, missiles, sanctions) remain unresolved; market rules explicitly exclude 'temporary extension' from a permanent peace agreement, so the probability of signing a legally binding final agreement that explicitly and permanently ends military hostilities before July 31 is low.

As of May 19, 2026, the US and Iran have not reached any written agreement that clearly and permanently ends military hostilities between the two countries, nor have both governments officially confirmed that a lasting end to military hostilities has been achieved. The ceasefire since April 7 is only a temporary/extended ceasefire. In early May, the US and Iran were still exchanging drafts through Pakistan, but Trump publicly called Iran's counter-proposal 'completely unacceptable' on May 10, while Iran said the US proposal amounted to 'surrender'. On May 17, Trump again issued a military threat to Iran saying 'nothing will be left', and called the existing ceasefire 'garbage'. On May 19, Vance said negotiations had made 'a lot of progress', but gave no clear roadmap and did not announce an imminent signing. Considering that core differences such as nuclear enrichment, sanctions, the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, frozen assets, and Israel's demands on Iran's nuclear facilities remain sharp, and there are only more than two months left until July 31, the likelihood of reaching a permanent peace agreement that meets the definition is low.

As of May 19, 2026, there is no official announcement from the US or Iranian governments or credible authoritative media reports indicating that the two countries have signed or formally reached a permanent peace agreement that explicitly and permanently ends military hostilities. Historically, US-Iran relations are highly sensitive and volatile, and the political and security conditions for reaching a legally binding comprehensive peace agreement in the short term are not yet mature, so the possibility of achieving a "permanent peace agreement" within the given time frame is extremely low.

As of May 19, 2026, the US and Iran have not reached a permanent peace agreement. Although the two sides reached a two-week ceasefire agreement in early April and held multiple rounds of negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan, the negotiations broke down on April 12 without reaching any agreement. Since then, tensions have continued, and deep differences remain between the two sides. Although the Trump administration said in late May that negotiations were in the "final stage," as of the cutoff time, the two sides had not signed or formally confirmed any permanent peace agreement that meets the definition. The definition requires a 'permanent' end to military hostilities, and the current temporary ceasefire and negotiation stalemate do not meet this standard.

As of May 19, 2026, public information shows that the US and Iran have not yet reached a consensus with substantive progress on a permanent ceasefire, and multiple rounds of negotiations have failed to break through core differences. The remaining time window makes it extremely difficult to complete the signing or official confirmation process of a permanent peace agreement that meets the rules.

As of May 19, 2026, the US and Iran have huge differences on core issues such as the nuclear issue, sanctions relief, military presence, and control of the Strait of Hormuz. The US has rejected Iran's 14-point plan, mutual trust is severely lacking, and the probability of reaching a permanent peace agreement meeting the definition within just 73 days is extremely low.

US-Iran relations have been hostile since 1979, involving multiple complex issues such as nuclear programs, regional proxies, and economic sanctions. Although a two-week temporary ceasefire was reached on April 7, 2026, converting a temporary ceasefire into a permanent peace agreement usually requires a lengthy negotiation process. The resolution rules explicitly exclude temporary ceasefire extensions and require both sides to sign a formal written agreement or publicly confirm a permanent end to military hostilities, setting a very high threshold. Considering the depth of core differences and the complexity of negotiations, the probability of reaching a permanent peace agreement within the specified period is very low.

As of May 19, 2026, there is no public information indicating that the United States and Iran have reached a permanent peace agreement. As of the knowledge cutoff date, there are no official statements or authoritative reports confirming that both sides have signed or formally adopted a written agreement meeting the criteria. Neither government has provided clear public confirmation indicating that a final agreement meeting the criteria has been reached. The lack of consensus in credible reporting supports the conclusion that the two sides have not reached a permanent peace agreement.

Based on information and materials as of May 19, 2026, the likelihood of the US and Iran reaching a permanent peace agreement before July 31 is extremely low. The main reasons are as follows: 1. **Negotiation status and core differences**: The US and Iran remain deadlocked on core issues. The US insists that Iran completely abandon uranium enrichment activities, dismantle major nuclear facilities, and accept an 'indefinitely valid' nuclear agreement, while Iran insists that uranium enrichment is its right for peaceful use of nuclear energy and refuses to dismantle nuclear facilities or accept indefinite restrictions on nuclear activities. The two sides have also made no substantive progress on key issues such as sanctions relief and war reparations. Latest reports show that the US's 'five-point demands' are viewed by Iran as 'no substantive concessions', and negotiations are at an impasse, making it difficult to bridge differences in the short term (kQ5b9BYX,3m1d63GY,zhXwZyrF,3nAz3KVX). 2. **Temporary agreement framework not finalized**: Although the US and Iran reached a temporary ceasefire agreement on April 7 and started a 30-day follow-up negotiation, the agreement is only intended to 'end the war' and set a framework for nuclear negotiations, not a permanent peace agreement. Iran has clearly stated that the nuclear issue has 'not been discussed' in the current negotiations, and there are major differences on key terms such as the duration of uranium enrichment suspension (US demands 20 years, Iran only agrees to 5 years). In addition, many terms of the temporary agreement are premised on 'reaching a final agreement', meaning that hostilities could resume (2kZr55Zu,KSkQQkh3,YXhC6NCL,2sTKIrwq). 3. **Official statements and lack of mutual trust**: US President Trump has repeatedly emphasized that Iran 'must never have nuclear weapons' and threatened to resume military action if negotiations fail; Iran's Supreme Leader Khamenei has reiterated that if the 'state of war' continues, he will consider opening new fronts. Neither side has sent a clear signal of abandoning military means, and mutual trust is severely lacking. Iran's distrust of the US's 'negotiating while fighting' and US doubts about Iran's ability to comply further increase the difficulty of reaching a permanent agreement (a5gVjaSJ,MI0FTr8h,GhVUTlyI,gXz5iomn). 4. **Time and procedural constraints**: According to market rules, a permanent peace agreement requires both parties to sign a written agreement or the government to publicly confirm the agreement. As of May 19, the two sides have only reached a temporary ceasefire agreement, and there is no official statement or document indicating that a permanent peace agreement has entered a substantive signing stage. The likelihood of completing the process from negotiation to agreement signing, domestic ratification, and international guarantees in the remaining time (May 19 to July 31) is extremely low (KSkQQkh3,XTEQLLeB,5W1k2YoE). 5. **Complexity of regional situation**: Iran demands a permanent ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah as a precondition for a US-Iran peace agreement, while Israel refuses to stop military operations against Hezbollah. The uncertainty of the situation in Lebanon and Iran's continued blockade of the Strait of Hormuz increase the difficulty of reaching a comprehensive agreement (YXhC6NCL,nCf8Oj0o,RvZmMLpP).

My judgment is NO. As of the information cutoff on May 19, 2026, the US and Iran only have a temporary ceasefire and a peace proposal still in stalemate, and have not yet met the conditions for both sides to sign or formally jointly confirm a permanent end to military hostilities. The April agreement was explicitly a two-week ceasefire; reports from May 18–19 still said negotiations had no breakthrough, the US had not confirmed acceptance of any proposal, and key nuclear issues and the Strait of Hormuz arrangements remained unresolved. Therefore, the probability of reaching a permanent peace agreement that meets the strict definition before July 31 is low. [web:2][web:47][web:46][web:17]

As of May 19, 2026 (information cutoff), the US and Iran remain in a state of "ceasefire + maritime blockade + sporadic military exchanges." The two sides have not even signed a temporary framework, let alone any written agreement explicitly committing to permanently ending military hostilities. The market's definition of a "permanent peace agreement" is extremely strict: it explicitly excludes ceasefire extensions, temporary agreements, and phased memoranda of understanding, requiring both sides to formally sign/adopt a written agreement or both governments to jointly and clearly announce that such an agreement has been reached. From the two-week ceasefire on April 7, the breakdown of Islamabad negotiations on April 11-12, the US announcement of a maritime blockade on April 13, the US airstrikes on Bandar Abbas and Qeshm Island on May 7, to Trump's threat on May 17-18 to "leave Iran with nothing" and then postponing large-scale strikes at the request of Gulf states, the negotiation trajectory shows phased, revocable transactional arrangements rather than a final peace treaty. The core differences (Witkoff insisting on a zero-enrichment red line vs. Iran insisting on first lifting the blockade and restoring Hormuz navigation before discussing nuclear issues) have not been substantively bridged as of the cutoff date. Coupled with internal veto players on both sides (Iran's Revolutionary Guard and Supreme Leader system, and Trump himself repeatedly overturning negotiators' concessions), the probability of reaching and formally confirming a "permanent peace agreement" within the remaining weeks to ten weeks is very low.

As of May 19, 2026, although the US and Iran have maintained a temporary ceasefire and indirect contact under the mediation of third parties such as Pakistan, their direct negotiations in Islamabad have not resulted in a substantive long-term agreement. The US and Iran have huge differences on core issues such as the nuclear program, comprehensive sanctions relief, and passage rights in the Strait of Hormuz, and in early May there were still sporadic maritime frictions and blockade confrontations between the two sides. According to market rules, a qualifying "permanent peace agreement" must be signed by both parties or publicly issue a formal document that clearly and permanently ends military hostilities, excluding temporary ceasefire extensions or non-binding memoranda of understanding. The likelihood of reaching such a historic permanent peace agreement in the extremely short time before July 31, 2026 is very low.