As US-Iran tensions remain elevated following military strikes and a fragile ceasefire in early 2026, a detailed draft proposal for a new nuclear agreement has surfaced in online discussions. The document outlines Iran accepting a 15-year suspension of uranium enrichment (with exceptions for medical isotope research reactors), partial conversion and downblending of its 60% and 20% enriched stockpiles that would remain inside the country, full IAEA supervision of nuclear sites, reopening of the Strait of Hormuz potentially including toll collection rights, phased US sanctions relief, unfreezing of approximately $20 billion in Iranian assets, a US non-aggression pact backed by UN Security Council resolution and congressional treaty, and US military withdrawal elements. While the precise wording originates from unverified channels, its core parameters closely track publicly reported negotiating positions from recent rounds of talks. Reports from April 2026 indicate the US has pushed for a 20-year suspension of nuclear activities to prevent weaponization while allowing Iran to preserve its NPT rights on paper, whereas Iranian officials have countered with shorter pauses around five years alongside demands for sanctions relief and security guarantees. Handling of highly enriched uranium stockpiles has been a sticking point, with Iran favoring domestic downblending under IAEA eyes rather than removal, aligning with elements in the leaked draft. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has publicly stressed that any viable agreement requires robust, intrusive verification measures beyond current access limitations. The Strait of Hormuz features prominently in real diplomacy: Iran has pursued legislation and proposals for tolls on transiting vessels as a sovereignty assertion and revenue mechanism, while the US has prioritized unrestricted reopening of the waterway amid threats of further escalation. This convergence suggests the circulating proposal may reflect backchannel explorations or trial balloons designed to bridge gaps between maximalist demands—US calls for zero enrichment and facility dismantlement versus Iran's insistence on enrichment rights and war reparations. Such leaks can serve multiple functions: testing domestic reactions in Tehran and Washington, shaping narrative ahead of legacy media coverage, or functioning as disinformation to expose red lines. Amid rising Persia-Israel frictions and Iran's diminished proxy network post-conflict, a framework incorporating non-aggression assurances via UN and congressional ratification could represent a heterodox shift from past JCPOA models, potentially buying time for both sides but risking accusations of strategic traps if enrichment resumes after the suspension period. Real progress remains uncertain, with talks in venues like Islamabad showing persistent gaps on verification, sanctions scope, and regional de-escalation as of mid-April 2026.