When world leaders welcomed President Donald Trump’s preliminary deal with Iran this past week, many of them expressed hope that it would return normalcy to the global energy markets and trade routes disrupted by the war.

But their praise was mitigated with caution. They know the details left for future negotiations could leave the world with dark clouds of economic and security uncertainty for months or years to come.

The preliminary deal, which is vaguely worded, punts the future of Iran’s nuclear program to those new negotiations. It does not address Iran’s missile program and regional ambitions, spooking both Israel and Iran’s Arab neighbors. Israel is not a party to the deal, raising the possibility that Israel could upend it through renewed conflict with Iran and its Lebanese ally, Hezbollah. And it fails to resolve whether the Strait of Hormuz, the crucial maritime trade route off southern Iran, will remain open for free passage.

French President Emmanuel Macron seemed to speak for a community of world leaders when he was asked by a television anchor on Thursday who won the war.

“I don’t think we can say it’s totally over,” he replied.

Here are some of the questions left unanswered by the preliminary deal.

1. The Fate of the Strait of Hormuz

The strait remains the most economically consequential question mark of the deal.

Before Tehran choked off the strait, in retaliation for U.S. and Israeli attacks on Iran, oil tankers freely flowed through it. Their cargo constituted roughly a quarter of the world’s oil, much of it sent to Asia.

The interim agreement with Iran says that tankers should now be allowed to pass through the strait without paying fees — “for 60 days only.” That means Tehran could impose a toll thereafter, raising the cost of shipping and fuel for a large part of the world, if no further deal is negotiated by then.

2. Iran’s Nuclear Program

The biggest security worry for global leaders is the fate of the Iranian nuclear program.

The deal says that Iran has reaffirmed its commitment to not producing a nuclear weapon, a pledge that it has reiterated for decades. It also requires Iran to “down-blend” — or dilute — its enriched nuclear material, which could be used to build a nuclear bomb.

But unlike the deal secured by President Barack Obama in 2015, Trump’s interim arrangement does not require Iran to ship that material beyond its borders. Nor is there anything in the text that forbids Iran from enriching new material or forces the closure of its nuclear facilities, both issues that the deal leaves for negotiation over the next 60 days.

European leaders like German Chancellor Friedrich Merz want to see clearer measures, including ways to verify Iranian progress on defusing its nuclear-weapon ambitions. And they appear unlikely to ease their own economic restrictions on Iran without such steps.

3. Iran’s Other Military Assets

Iran’s neighbors and enemies in the Middle East do not just fear Iran’s nuclear ambitions. They also worry about Iranian missiles and drones — used to damage Israel and Arab states in the Persian Gulf throughout the recent war — and its support for proxies around the region, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.

Trump’s interim deal does not address Iran’s arsenal of non-nuclear weapons, nor does it encourage Iran to diminish its support for regional militias. That omission has frustrated not only Israel, but also America’s Arab allies, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, analysts said.

Because the deal also offers Iran considerable economic relief, both Arabs and Israelis fear Iran might now be financially empowered to restore its arsenal and scale up its geopolitical ambitions across the Middle East.

4. Israel’s Intentions

Israeli leaders are livid about the peace agreement, and they have quickly become a wild card for the next round of negotiations.

The deal calls for the immediate and permanent termination of military operations, “including in Lebanon,” parts of which Israel occupied during the war in order to battle Hezbollah.

But Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Monday that he did not feel bound by the deal. Israel launched new airstrikes on Lebanon on Friday after its military said four of its soldiers were killed in a Hezbollah attack.

The situation appeared to calm, at least briefly, when Israel’s ambassador to Washington, Yechiel Leiter, said later Friday that the Israeli military had “halted all offensive operations.” He added that Israel would remain in southern Lebanon “to rid the area of Hezbollah and dismantle its terror infrastructure.”

Officials on both sides of the Atlantic have pushed for Netanyahu to stop his attacks in Lebanon, moves that Iran cited to justify pulling out of new negotiations on Friday, diplomats said.

“It is now imperative that the ceasefire negotiated between the U.S. and Iran hold in southern Lebanon as well,” Merz told reporters on Friday in Brussels, adding, “I have also made this clear time and again in my discussions with Prime Minister Netanyahu.”

–

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.

By Jim Tankersley/Hilary Swift

c.2026 The New York Times Company