“Negotiators from Iran and major world powers reached agreement Thursday on a framework for a final agreement to curb Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for relief from international sanctions, an accord that President Obama hailed as a ‘good deal’ that would make the world a safer place,” the Washington Post reports.

“Participants in the talks said the sides, including the United States and its key European allies, would promptly start drafting a final accord to be completed by a June 30 deadline.”

Wall Street Journal: “The deal would place strong constraints and controls on Iran’s nuclear work for up to 25 years, with severe limits for the first decade. U.S. officials said Iran’s timeline for amassing enough nuclear fuel for a weapon would rise to at least one year for the first decade of a deal. That is in line with the key Western demand. Iran’s so-called breakout time is currently two to three months.”

“But it was still unclear how two of the major sticking points in the final days of negotiations were resolved. One unanswered question was when exactly sanctions would be eased, and the other was how quickly Iran will be able to scale up its nuclear activities after the first decade.”

New York Times: “There was no mistaking the upbeat mood surrounding the announcement, following eight days of intense debate between Secretary of State John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Mohammad Javad Zarif.”

Politico: Republicans trash Iran deal

Washington Post: “Much of President Obama’s foreign policy agenda has been foisted upon him during his six years in office. He inherited two wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, neither of which he’s been able to end. He’s had to react to chaos in the Middle East and a Russian incursion in Ukraine.”

“The negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program are a different matter. They are Obama’s choice, and he’s fought to keep them moving since the beginning of his presidency despite setbacks and second-guessing from Republicans, fellow Democrats and longtime foreign allies.”

“I’m embarrassed for them. For them to address a letter to the Ayatollah, who they claim is our mortal enemy, and their basic argument is ‘don’t deal with our president because you can’t trust him to follow through on an agreement’, that’s close to unprecedented.”

— President Obama, in an interview with Vice, on the letter GOP senators sent to Iranian leaders.

Iran’s supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that a letter from Republican lawmakers warning that any nuclear deal could be scrapped by the next U.S. president is a sign of “disintegration” in Washington, the New York Times reports.

Said Khamenei: “Isn’t this the ultimate degree of the collapse of political ethics and the U.S. system’s internal disintegration?”

He added that whenever the talks approach a deadline, “the tone of the other party, particularly the Americans, becomes harsher, harder and more violent. This is part of their tricks and deceits.”

“The open letter that 47 Senate Republicans sent to Iran’s leadership on Monday warning about making a nuclear agreement with President Obama is forcing Democrats to choose between confronting Tehran and rallying around Mr. Obama as he searches for a diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff,” the New York Times reports.

“Democrats say that as concerned as they are about an emerging deal with Iran, Republicans’ extraordinary moves to undermine Mr. Obama’s efforts to reach an agreement are weakening their resolve to cross party lines and challenge their own president.”

“Forty-seven Senate Republicans warned in an open letter to Iran’s leaders Monday that any agreement between the White House and Tehran on nuclear weapons could be quickly nullified or changed once President Barack Obama leaves office,” the Wall Street Journal reports.

“The letter, which was signed by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) and a number of top committee chairmen, said that unless approved by Congress, any agreement between world powers and Iran would be seen by GOP lawmakers as an executive agreement between Mr. Obama and Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei. Such an agreement may not stay in effect under future administrations and could be modified by lawmakers in the future, they wrote.”

The senators noted that Mr. Obama will leave office in January 2017, while “most of us will remain in office well beyond then—perhaps decades.”

Paul Waldman: “It’s safe to say that no president in modern times has had his legitimacy questioned by the opposition party as much as Barack Obama. But as his term in office enters its final phase, Republicans are embarking on an entirely new enterprise: They have decided that as long as he holds the office of the presidency, it’s no longer necessary to respect the office itself.”

New York Times: “Today, Mr. Obama needs a foreign policy accomplishment more than ever, and he sees time running out on his hope of changing the calculus in a Middle East where Americans are, against his instincts, back on the ground. But the forces arrayed against a deal are formidable — not just Mr. Khamenei and the country’s hard-liners, but newly empowered Republicans, some of his fellow Democrats, and many of the United States’ closest allies.”

“Yet even if a deal is struck it will be the beginning of an argument, rather than the end of one. For many of the president’s adversaries, the details of whatever deal he emerges with — how much warning the West would have if Iran raced for a bomb, for example — are almost beside the point.”