Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Become a member

Become a member

Iran to Readmit Nuclear Inspectors, JD Vance Says

US Vice-President JD Vance said Iran has agreed to allow international nuclear inspectors back into the country, describing the move as a significant step in efforts to secure a broader agreement following the recent conflict between Washington and Tehran.

Get today's headlines by email image.png

Speaking in Switzerland on Monday, Vance said discussions with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) could begin “as soon as today”, with inspectors expected to start returning at least this week.

The announcement followed the first round of talks between the United States and Iran aimed at reaching a final settlement after the war. Vance said the discussions had made substantial progress and provided a strong basis for future negotiations.

Talks Target Final Agreement

Earlier on Monday, mediators Qatar and Pakistan said the two sides had agreed on a roadmap intended to produce a final deal within 60 days.

Vance echoed that assessment, saying negotiators had established a “very good foundation” for a lasting agreement.

He highlighted Iran’s nuclear programme as the central issue for Washington, describing the planned return of inspectors as an important milestone and a first step toward permanently ending any potential Iranian nuclear weapons programme.

Iran has consistently maintained that its nuclear activities are intended solely for civilian purposes.

Inspectors and Nuclear Stockpiles

The 14-point memorandum of understanding signed last week by US President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian includes provisions concerning the IAEA and Iran’s stockpile of enriched nuclear material.

Although Tehran denies seeking nuclear weapons, a number of governments and the IAEA have expressed concerns about the nature of its nuclear activities.

The issue has been at the centre of international diplomacy for more than a decade. In 2015, Iran and six major powers — the United States, China, France, Russia, Germany and the United Kingdom — reached the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, commonly known as the JCPOA.

The agreement imposed limits on Iran’s nuclear programme and granted IAEA inspectors broad access to nuclear facilities and suspected sites.

However, Trump withdrew the United States from the accord in 2018, arguing that it failed to provide permanent restrictions and did not address Iran’s ballistic missile programme.

Following the 12-day war in June 2025, Iran suspended IAEA access to sites targeted by Israeli and US strikes. The following month, the agency withdrew its remaining inspectors from the country.

Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon

Vance said negotiators had also discussed reopening the Strait of Hormuz and arrangements to support a regional ceasefire.

According to a joint statement from the mediators, a communication channel has been established to prevent incidents and ensure the safe passage of commercial shipping through the waterway.

The parties also agreed to create a “de-confliction cell” involving the United States, Iran and Lebanon, with Qatar and Pakistan acting as facilitators. The mechanism is intended to help end military operations in Lebanon.

Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi said the Lebanon initiative would be the first major test of the agreement.

Despite the memorandum’s call for an end to fighting on all fronts, violence has continued in Lebanon. Israeli air strikes have reportedly killed at least 67 people since the deal was signed, while attacks by the armed group Hezbollah have killed five Israeli soldiers.

Join the discussion? Create account. orange.png

Already a member? haveyr-say.png


image.png
Adapted by ASEAN Now. Source 23 June 2026

User Feedback

Recommended Comments

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
6 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

There were no unrestricted inspections, to pretend as much is to lie.

Again, had the JCPOA remained in effect, Iran would now be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, unsanctioned, with the US and UN's blessing.

  • Unannounced (or "Short-Notice") Inspections: The IAEA had the authority to conduct inspections at short notice, as little as a few hours. These are designed to catch potential violations that might be hidden during the standard windows of a scheduled inspection.

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
16 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

There were no unrestricted inspections, to pretend as much is to lie.

Again, had the JCPOA remained in effect, Iran would now be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, unsanctioned, with the US and UN's blessing.

You are playing on words you know what the poster was meaning !!

The JCPOA never mandated "unrestricted" or "anytime, anywhere" inspections of all Iranian military or suspected nuclear sites. Instead, the deal allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to request access to undeclared locations.

SiSePuede419 Platinum Member

SiSePuede419

Advanced Member

So, basically back to the old Obama deal, Trump tore up in his little white supremacist tantrum. 🤣barack-obama-4576002.jpg

Front Row Advanced Member

Front Row

Member

Lots of reporting by MSM as well as posts in SM (Twitter, Bluesky). Vance is saying one thing, Iran is saying the opposite. I don't think they're even close to resolving the nuclear issue. I don't think they're even close to starting to seriously discuss the nuclear issue. However, I think they've made more progress than anyone is letting on and I'm honestly surprised that they are still there and still talking. So that's a win for the world at the moment.

By the way, that part of Lake Lucerne and that particular resort is stunningly beautiful. If I were on the negotiating team you would have a hard time pulling me away from there to return to Washington.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
41 minutes ago, MikeandDow said:

You are playing on words you know what the poster was meaning !!

The JCPOA never mandated "unrestricted" or "anytime, anywhere" inspections of all Iranian military or suspected nuclear sites. Instead, the deal allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to request access to undeclared locations.

Exactly, that's why it was useless.

Had it not been useless, Obama would have taken it to Congress and had it ratified as a treaty in the Senate, such that no president could just tear it up.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
56 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:
  • Unannounced (or "Short-Notice") Inspections: The IAEA had the authority to conduct inspections at short notice, as little as a few hours. These are designed to catch potential violations that might be hidden during the standard windows of a scheduled inspection.

But only in approved areas, correct?

Without anytime, anywhere inspections, the agreement was useless.

And because had the JCPOA remained in effect, Iran would now be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, unsanctioned, with the US and UN's blessing, it was worse than useless.

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
18 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Exactly, that's why it was useless.

Had it not been useless, Obama would have taken it to Congress and had it ratified as a treaty in the Senate, such that no president could just tear it up.

Ok !! you know what Obama was thinking !!!! maybe that should have happend but you are guessing !!

Eric Loh Star Member

Eric Loh

Advanced Member
45 minutes ago, Front Row said:

Lots of reporting by MSM as well as posts in SM (Twitter, Bluesky). Vance is saying one thing, Iran is saying the opposite. I don't think they're even close to resolving the nuclear issue. I don't think they're even close to starting to seriously discuss the nuclear issue. However, I think they've made more progress than anyone is letting on and I'm honestly surprised that they are still there and still talking. So that's a win for the world at the moment.

By the way, that part of Lake Lucerne and that particular resort is stunningly beautiful. If I were on the negotiating team you would have a hard time pulling me away from there to return to Washington.

I will be interested to know exactly who will lead the discussion on the nuclear issue. Obama had Ernist Moniz the Energy Secretary who is a nuclear physicist. I heard that Witkoff and Jared are relying on crashed course to learn nuclear matters. Vance's Chief of Staff has just resigned. That will complicate matters as Jacob Reses deal with diplomacy, complicated matters to logistic for Vance. He also counsel Vance. Then you have Trump who should be closely monitoring and guiding Vance but instead he has been throwing a spanner in the negotiation with his contradictory stance and incoherent outburst. Vance will need close coordination with allies to present a united front but he has cultivated a contentious relationship with allies. It is not looking good for Vance in the upcoming negotiation. It will dragged on for many months with Trump sniping at his heels.

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
10 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

I will be interested to know exactly who will lead the discussion on the nuclear issue. Obama had Ernist Moniz the Energy Secretary who is a nuclear physicist. I heard that Witkoff and Jared are relying on crashed course to learn nuclear matters. Vance's Chief of Staff has just resigned. That will complicate matters as Jacob Reses deal with diplomacy, complicated matters to logistic for Vance. He also counsel Vance. Then you have Trump who should be closely monitoring and guiding Vance but instead he has been throwing a spanner in the negotiation with his contradictory stance and incoherent outburst. Vance will need close coordination with allies to present a united front but he has cultivated a contentious relationship with allies. It is not looking good for Vance in the upcoming negotiation. It will dragged on for many months with Trump sniping at his heels.

Its hard to negotiate against no!! and with trump abusing the negotiations

Front Row Advanced Member

Front Row

Member
22 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

I will be interested to know exactly who will lead the discussion on the nuclear issue. Obama had Ernist Moniz the Energy Secretary who is a nuclear physicist. I heard that Witkoff and Jared are relying on crashed course to learn nuclear matters. Vance's Chief of Staff has just resigned. That will complicate matters as Jacob Reses deal with diplomacy, complicated matters to logistic for Vance. He also counsel Vance. Then you have Trump who should be closely monitoring and guiding Vance but instead he has been throwing a spanner in the negotiation with his contradictory stance and incoherent outburst. Vance will need close coordination with allies to present a united front but he has cultivated a contentious relationship with allies. It is not looking good for Vance in the upcoming negotiation. It will dragged on for many months with Trump sniping at his heels.

“Only the best people.”

You ask an important question. I’m guessing it will be someone in totally over their head.

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

Exactly, that's why it was useless.

Had it not been useless, Obama would have taken it to Congress and had it ratified as a treaty in the Senate, such that no president could just tear it up.

I suspect Obama assumed no US president would ever be so dumb as to tear up a deal that stopped an enemy from having nuclear weapons........but then along came Trump....whoops.

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

But only in approved areas, correct?

Without anytime, anywhere inspections, the agreement was useless.

And because had the JCPOA remained in effect, Iran would now be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, unsanctioned, with the US and UN's blessing, it was worse than useless.

What?

Purdey Diamond Member

Purdey

Advanced Member
On 6/23/2026 at 8:34 AM, Smokey and the Bandit said:

They need not just IAEA inspectors , but US inspectors in Iran.

The United States cannot rely solely on a UN body to verify American security goals.

The United States is a member state of IAEA, and American experts routinely serve as inspectors, holding technical positions, and conducting safeguards inspections globally.

Eric Loh Star Member

Eric Loh

Advanced Member
9 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

What?

He is a mini Trump.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
4 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

Ok !! you know what Obama was thinking !!!! maybe that should have happend but you are guessing !!

I'm not guessing.

Unless you think Obama is a dumba**, that knows nothing about how treaties work.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
57 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

I suspect Obama assumed no US president would ever be so dumb as to tear up a deal that stopped an enemy from having nuclear weapons........but then along came Trump....whoops.

Except that the deal allowed Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, and barred the US from doing anything about it.

Why do you keep leaving that part out? whooops indeed

Eric Loh Star Member

Eric Loh

Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

I'm not guessing.

Unless you think Obama is a dumba**, that knows nothing about how treaties work.

JCPOA is not a treaty.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
47 minutes ago, Purdey said:

The United States is a member state of IAEA, and American experts routinely serve as inspectors, holding technical positions, and conducting safeguards inspections globally.

But the JCPOA did not mandate anywhere anytime inspections,

But we all know that, yes?

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
1 minute ago, Eric Loh said:

JCPOA is not a treaty.

Of course it's not. Had the JCPOA not been a piece of cr*p that put Iran on track to develop a nuclear weapon, Obama could have put it to the Senate and had a treaty no one could tear up.

Obama loved him some Iran.

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Except that the deal allowed Iran to develop a nuclear weapon, and barred the US from doing anything about it.

Why do you keep leaving that part out? whooops indeed

Under the terms of the deal, Iran had capped its uranium enrichment at 3.67%, limited its stockpile to 300 kilograms, and restricted both the number and the technological sophistication of its operational centrifuges.

Where does the deal say they can develop a nuclear weapon?........that seems like a bit of loophole in a deal constructed to prevent the development of a nuclear weapon.......I'm surprised that the US, China, EU, UK didn't spot that clause.

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
2 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

Under the terms of the deal, Iran had capped its uranium enrichment at 3.67%, limited its stockpile to 300 kilograms, and restricted both the number and the technological sophistication of its operational centrifuges.

Where does the deal say they can develop a nuclear weapon?........that seems like a bit of loophole in a deal constructed to prevent the development of a nuclear weapon.......I'm surprised that the US, China, EU, UK didn't spot that clause.

The guy is trolling, bating he has repeated the same thing over and over

Eric Loh Star Member

Eric Loh

Advanced Member
5 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Of course it's not. Had the JCPOA not been a piece of cr*p that put Iran on track to develop a nuclear weapon, Obama could have put it to the Senate and had a treaty no one could tear up.

Obama loved him some Iran.

So all your bs about treaty is just another of your typical trolling. Looks like your dear leader taking a page of Obama's JCPOA but only worse. He sure gave Iran an early Christmas presents in plane loads of billions. Make Iran great again must be his new catchphrase

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
4 minutes ago, MIke B Bad said:

Under the terms of the deal, Iran had capped its uranium enrichment at 3.67%, limited its stockpile to 300 kilograms, and restricted both the number and the technological sophistication of its operational centrifuges.

Where does the deal say they can develop a nuclear weapon?........that seems like a bit of loophole in a deal constructed to prevent the development of a nuclear weapon.......I'm surprised that the US, China, EU, UK didn't spot that clause.

When it expired.

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
4 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

When it expired.

Well!

2025 as an expiry date was infinitely preferable to the Trump's version of abandoning the deal with nothing to replace it seven years earlier.

Yellowtail Star Member

Yellowtail

Advanced Member
1 hour ago, MIke B Bad said:

Well!

2025 as an expiry date was infinitely preferable to the Trump's version of abandoning the deal with nothing to replace it seven years earlier.

You mean to say that a wealthy Iran, with the bomb and a delivery system would be better than what we have now?

Smokey and the Bandit Gold Member

Smokey and the Bandit

Advanced Member
17 hours ago, Purdey said:

The United States is a member state of IAEA, and American experts routinely serve as inspectors, holding technical positions, and conducting safeguards inspections globally.

You are correct.

When an American nuclear scientist or technical expert gets hired by the IAEA, they must take a formal oath of independence. Legally and operationally, they report directly to the IAEA leadership in Vienna (which answers to the UN), not to the United States government.

My point is that the verification team must include U.S. military and technical experts who report directly back to Washington, rather than UN bureaucrats who might sanitize the findings to preserve a diplomatic deal.

gargamon Ruby Member

gargamon

Advanced Member
18 minutes ago, Smokey and the Bandit said:

My point is that the verification team must include U.S. military and technical experts who report directly back to Washington, rather than UN bureaucrats who might sanitize the findings to preserve a diplomatic deal.

  1. Trump sycophants that propagate any lie Trump tells? Yeah, that would be real helpful. Better no US involvement to ensure accuracy.

Emdog Platinum Member

Emdog

Advanced Member
21 hours ago, MikeandDow said:

This is All immaterial, What JCPOA did dint do!! the agreement is in the past ! the question at the moment is who is telling the truth Vance or Iran

I'd say it is a liars contest. However, I'd be more likely to trust Iran regarding their position statements than Trump or Vance telling me what Iran's position is. Whatever the outcome, it will be worse than JCPOA, guaranteed.

On 6/24/2026 at 8:45 AM, MikeandDow said:

You can make a bomb with little as 10% enrichment, but the Bomb would be the size of the good year blimp and have an inconsequentially small yield in kilotons range but it would still work,

Would make me laugh if not so pitiful... A great big club the size of Florida would also work, and about equally absurd.

On 6/24/2026 at 8:56 AM, Yellowtail said:

If the JCPOA were left intact, Iran would have a bomb and a delivery system, and the US and the UN would be barred from doing anything about it.

They would not have a bomb. This lacks any sort of reading of the agreement with comprehension. Almost equally absurd is assertion US & UN barred from doing anything about it. Just who would bar them? How? What means?

MikeandDow Ruby Member

MikeandDow

Advanced Member
3 minutes ago, Emdog said:

I'd say it is a liars contest. However, I'd be more likely to trust Iran regarding their position statements than Trump or Vance telling me what Iran's position is. Whatever the outcome, it will be worse than JCPOA, guaranteed.

Would make me laugh if not so pitiful... A great big club the size of Florida would also work, and about equally absurd.

They would not have a bomb. This lacks any sort of reading of the agreement with comprehension. Almost equally absurd is assertion US & UN barred from doing anything about it. Just who would bar them? How? What means?

Of course it is absurd ! so is oh!! they have 60% enriched Uranium they are making bombs !!! it takes a lot more than having 60% Uranium to make a Nuke, no dough Iran was on the path to making a Nuke but years away And the American new that!!

MIke B Bad Silver Member

MIke B Bad

Advanced Member
13 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

You mean to say that a wealthy Iran, with the bomb and a delivery system would be better than what we have now?

How about an agreement that was working being left in place for the extra seven years it had left to run, rather than ripping it up and, in effect saying....go ahead refine your uranium and we'll worry about it when you get from 3% to 60%.......

Create an account or sign in to comment

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.