Tensions between the United States and Iran have reached a new critical phase. While a fragile ceasefire remains in place, efforts to turn the nearly three-week ceasefire into a permanent agreement appear to have stalled.
Hopes for talks to take place over the weekend in Pakistan’s capital, Islamabad, were dashed after US President Donald Trump canceled the envoy’s visit as both Iran and the US stick to their respective demands, particularly over Iran’s nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Monday blamed the United States for the failed talks. During his visit to Russia, he said, “Despite progress made in the previous negotiations due to the US approach, we were unable to achieve our goals due to excessive demands.”
But experts said the stalemate reflected a slowdown rather than a breakdown in negotiations, citing numerous examples from history showing that diplomacy is rarely linear and often involves deadlocks, setbacks and backdoor involvement.
So where are the negotiations currently and what could happen next?
What is the current status of negotiations?
President Trump told reporters in Florida on Saturday that he canceled a visit to Pakistan by his diplomatic envoy, Steve Witkoff, and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, because the meeting would have involved too much travel and expense to consider inappropriate offers from Iran.
The next day, President Trump said Iran could make a call if it wanted to negotiate an end to the war, which began with U.S. and Israeli shelling of Iran on February 28.
“If you want to talk, you can come to us, you can call us. You know, we have a phone. We have a nice, secure line,” Trump told Fox News.
“They know what should be in the agreement. It’s very simple: they can’t have nuclear weapons. Otherwise, there’s no reason to have talks.”
Iran had already expressed hesitation about participating in talks with the United States. Tehran officials said direct talks were pointless at this point, saying U.S. actions such as the naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz violated the ceasefire and stood in the way of meaningful dialogue.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian spoke by phone with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif on Saturday and said his country would not accept “forced negotiations” under threat or blockade.
Since early March, Iran has effectively closed off the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s pre-war oil and natural gas supplies passed. Meanwhile, Washington imposed a naval blockade of Iranian ports and ships days after the ceasefire began on April 8.
This disrupted global oil supplies and contributed to rising prices. Countries around the world are being forced to seek alternative supplies and implement austerity measures to keep their economies afloat.
Despite the collapse of direct engagement, diplomacy continues through indirect channels. According to Iran’s Fars News Agency, Iran sent a “written message” to the United States through Pakistani mediators outlining red lines that should not be crossed, including its position on the nuclear issue and the Strait of Hormuz.
At the same time, Mr. Araghchi has visited Pakistan, Oman, and Russia in the past three days, and has been actively engaged in regional diplomacy.
“This is a good opportunity to consult with our Russian friends about the developments that have taken place in connection with the war during this period and what is currently happening,” Araghchi said in a video interview posted by Iran’s IRNA news agency from St. Petersburg.
Has diplomacy between the US and Iran failed?
While the gulf between Iran and the United States remains wide, with Iran refusing to abandon its nuclear program, which includes enriching uranium and insisting it is for peaceful purposes only, a ceasefire between the long-time adversaries remains largely in place, indicating neither side wants to return to full-scale war.
Emma Shortis, director of the Australia Institute’s international and security affairs program, said there was “room for progress” despite the stalemate. A meaningful diplomatic effort “takes years to build,” she said.
“There were certainly signals that there may be room to move, especially on the uranium enrichment issue,” she told Al Jazeera. However, she warned that this is all subject to “unstable leaders” who could “change their minds at the last moment”.
President Trump said over the weekend that canceling talks does not necessarily mean a return to active combat.
On Sunday, he referred to Iran’s new proposal, which he described as a “much better plan” and suggested there may be some flexibility.
Shortis said President Trump is under “tremendous pressure,” especially domestically, because the war is “hugely” unpopular with the American public. “Pressure will continue to build as the Strait of Hormuz remains effectively closed, impacting U.S. gas prices,” she said.
Academic Rob Geist Pinfold agreed with Shortis, saying that while diplomacy has not failed, the two countries face an “irresolvable rift” for now.
“The irony here is that neither side wants to go back to war. No one wants to reignite the conflict,” added Geist Pinfold, a lecturer at King’s College London.
He said Iran’s calculations are shaped by the damage it has already suffered. “Iran has had a lot of assets damaged. The military feels the need to recover. It wants some breathing room.”
Meanwhile, the United States is wary of being drawn into another costly Gulf conflict, due in part to Iran’s ability to impose costs on the region and the global economy.
“Iran’s deterrence strategy has worked. By attacking the Gulf states, Iran has succeeded in causing enough chaos to affect the global economy and global finance,” he said. “The United States has lost the will to continue the war.”
The scholar predicted that the current situation could solidify into a semi-permanent ceasefire, leading to a gradual, albeit fragile, return to normalcy.
“Neither side feels that the other has the upper hand, but ironically, both sides feel that they have the upper hand, which results in these conflicts that are neither peace nor war.”
This situation could continue for a long time, he said. “This is a power relationship that can continue more or less indefinitely until one side forces the other to compromise,” he added.
How have the negotiations been concluded so far?
The 2015 Iran nuclear deal, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), took nearly two years to successfully negotiate, including secret negotiations brokered by Oman. Its ultimate success came only after a long period of stalemate and gradual progress. Trump unilaterally canceled the agreement in 2018 during his first term.
Chris Doyle, director of the London-based Council for Arab-British Understanding, told Al Jazeera that “all the major negotiations to end wars have their own characteristics,” citing the 1973 Paris Peace Accords between the United States and Vietnam as an example.
“Here we see sides that are at odds with each other, trying to reach a deal that doesn’t actually end hostilities. There were also big differences,” he said. Negotiations leading to the agreement began in 1968.
Nevertheless, violations of the agreement occurred immediately while the United States was effectively out of the war. Ultimately, South Vietnam fell to communist forces in 1975. “Many of the adversaries in the conflict have agreements in place, but ensuring they continue is another matter,” Doyle warned.
Similar stop-start nature of diplomacy can be seen in other conflicts, including some very recent and ongoing ones.
Initial talks between Russia and Ukraine in 2022 initially raised hopes for a settlement, but ultimately collapsed. However, diplomatic engagement is not completely over. There were also smaller agreements, including exchanging prisoners, repatriating children and allowing Ukrainian grain exports across the Black Sea.
