Fact check: Has there been any official statement from Iran or Israel about a ceasefire?

1. Summary of the results

Yes, there have been multiple official statements from both Iran and Israel regarding a ceasefire agreement that is currently in effect, though it has experienced significant turbulence since its implementation.

Official Iranian Statements:

• Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian made several key declarations: he stated that Iran will not violate the ceasefire if Israel doesn't ^[1], emphasized that Iran does not seek nuclear weapons and will not violate the ceasefire unless Israel does first ^[1], and reiterated that Iran will not break the ceasefire pact unless Israel breaks it first ^[2]
• Iran has also denied breaking the ceasefire agreement when accused by Israel ^[3]

Official Israeli Statements:

• IDF Chief of General Staff Eyal Zamir stated that Israel's campaign against Iran is not over, despite the ceasefire agreement ^[1]
• Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced that Israel will refrain from additional attacks ^[4]
• Israel's Defence Minister Israel Katz initially ordered a strike on Tehran, which was later called off by Trump ^[5]

The ceasefire agreement was officially announced by US President Trump, who stated that both Iran and Israel had agreed to the terms ^{[5] [6] [7]}.

2. Missing context/alternative viewpoints

The ceasefire has been extremely volatile from its inception, with both sides making accusations of violations almost immediately after it took effect ^{[6] [7]}. This critical context reveals that while official statements exist, the agreement's stability is questionable.

Key missing context includes:

• The ceasefire got off to a "rocky start" with both sides accusing each other of violating the truce ^[7]
• Trump expressed frustration and disappointment with both sides, even lashing out at Israel and Iran amid accusations of ceasefire violations ^{[1] [3]}
• Iran was described as being "amenable to the ceasefire because it was in a 'weakened state'" ^[8], suggesting the agreement may have been born out of necessity rather than genuine peace intentions
• Israel accused Iran of launching missiles in violation of the ceasefire, while Iran denied these claims ^[6]

Alternative viewpoints on motivations:

• Military and defense contractors would benefit from continued conflict, as prolonged tensions justify increased defense spending and weapons sales
• Political leaders on both sides may benefit from appearing strong to their domestic audiences while also being seen as peacemakers internationally
• Regional powers and international mediators gain influence by positioning themselves as essential to maintaining stability

3. Potential misinformation/bias in the original statement

The original question appears neutral and factual in its inquiry about official statements. However, it lacks important context about the fragile and contested nature of the ceasefire agreement.

Potential areas of incomplete information:

• The question doesn't acknowledge that while official statements exist, both sides have immediately begun accusing each other of violations ^{[6] [7]}
• It doesn't capture the active role of the US President in both announcing and attempting to maintain the ceasefire ^{[5] [6] [4]}
• The framing suggests a simple yes/no answer when the reality is that official statements exist but reveal a highly unstable agreement with both sides threatening retaliation ^{[5] [3]}

The question would be more complete if it asked about the nature and stability of the official statements rather than just their existence, given that the ceasefire appears to be more of a temporary pause than a lasting peace agreement.