The United States is considering a new offer from Iran to end the ongoing war, with a fragile ceasefire between the longtime rivals.
The proposal focuses on reopening the strategic Strait of Hormuz and postponing an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program, perhaps the most contentious issue between Iran and the United States.
Recommended stories
list of 3 itemsend of list
The proposal has drawn scrutiny in Washington, with officials expressing skepticism, according to US media.
Early signs from the Trump administration suggest that the plan is unlikely to be accepted in its current form, potentially further delaying prospects for a permanent end to the currently suspended U.S.-Israel war against Iran that has killed thousands and sent global energy prices soaring.
Here’s what we know so far:
What does Iran’s latest proposal include?
Iran’s latest proposal seeks to ease tensions in the Gulf without immediately imposing restrictions on its nuclear program, as the United States has demanded. The Iranian government has proposed reopening the Strait of Hormuz on the condition that the United States agrees to lift its naval blockade on Iranian ports and end the war.
Iran has effectively closed the shipping strait, putting pressure on the global economy through soaring energy prices and disrupting supply chains. In peacetime, one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies are transported through the narrow shipping lanes that connect Gulf oil-producing countries to the open ocean.
Days after the ceasefire began on April 8, President Trump announced a blockade of Iranian ports and ships, limiting Iran’s ability to export oil and cutting off a vital source of revenue.
But a central feature of Iran’s proposal to reopen the strait to all traffic is that it would postpone discussion of Iran’s nuclear activities until after the war ends.
The proposal was conveyed to Washington through Pakistan, which acted as an intermediary.
Iran’s state-run Fars news agency reported that “These messages relate to some of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s red lines that should not be crossed, such as the nuclear issue and the Strait of Hormuz.”
“Informed sources stress that Mr. Araguchi is acting entirely within certain red lines and the diplomatic mission of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.”
The news agency said the messages relayed were “unrelated to negotiations” and “are considered an Iranian effort to clarify the regional situation.”
On Monday, Amir Saeed Iravani, the UN special envoy in Tehran, said “lasting stability and security” in the Gulf and wider region could only be achieved with a permanent and permanent cessation of aggression against Iran.
How is this proposal different from previous proposals?
Iranian analyst Abbas Asrani said Iran’s latest proposal is based on a “modified” approach.
Aslani, a senior fellow at the Middle East Center for Strategic Studies, told Al Jazeera that the Iranian government believes its previous model, based on compromising its nuclear program in exchange for economic sanctions relief, is no longer a “viable path toward a potential deal.”
“Iran believes that this will also serve as a confidence-building measure to compensate for the trust deficit issue,” it added.
Analyst Negar Mortazavi, a senior fellow at the Center for International Policy and host of the Iran Podcast, said Iran’s proposal seemed “reasonable” because the situation in the Strait of Hormuz “has created a global crisis that countries around the world want to see resolved.”
Mortazavi added: “Both Iran and Washington need to immediately focus on strait reform.” “If the US doesn’t lift the blockade, Iran won’t move, and if Iran doesn’t open the Strait, the US won’t move either. So this could be a good first step towards a more permanent ceasefire, and after de-escalating tensions, the two countries can talk about other issues.”
He said the nuclear issue was a “top priority” for both the United States and Israel, but also a “complex issue.”
“While the Iranian government once successfully negotiated a nuclear deal with the Obama administration, it took two years of intense negotiations,” she said.
“Iran also tried to negotiate its nuclear program with the Trump administration once last year and once this year, but in both cases the US president’s patience was very short and Iran was attacked in the middle of negotiations.”
As a result, Mortazavi said the nuclear issue could not be resolved in “a few hours of high-level talks between the vice president of the United States and the speaker of Iran’s parliament.”
“The nuclear issue… requires serious negotiations with technical experts and must be done with appropriate time and patience. It is better to take place after the end of a war, in an atmosphere of peace and calm, rather than during an active conflict between the two countries,” she added.
How has the US responded so far?
US President Donald Trump met with top national security advisers on Monday to discuss Iran’s proposal, the White House confirmed.
However, the US reaction was largely negative, according to media reports. According to Reuters, an anonymous U.S. official said President Trump was unhappy with the proposal because it did not include provisions regarding Iran’s nuclear program. “He doesn’t like this proposal,” the source said.
U.S. media outlet CNN reported, citing two people involved, that President Trump is unlikely to accept the proposal. The paper said that if the United States lifts the blockade on Iran’s ports without resolving questions over Iran’s nuclear program, it “could lose a significant portion of its leverage in the negotiations.”
Secretary of State Marco Rubio told Fox News on Monday that the proposal was “better than anything we thought we would submit,” but he questioned the Iranian government’s intentions.
“They’re very good negotiators,” he said. “We must ensure that any agreement, any agreement, definitively prevents us from moving towards nuclear weapons at any point in time.”
Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna, reporting from Washington, said “what was discussed is completely hidden” during the meeting between President Trump and his national security team.
“I don’t know exactly who on the national security team was in that meeting because it was so tense,” Hanna added.
“Typically, there will be some form of reading or additional information provided that fleshes out the details of such a meeting.”
What was the reaction from other countries?
“The U.S. and Iran feel that time is on their side, but the longer the situation drags on, the more difficult it will become,” said Mohamed El-Masry, an analyst at the Doha Graduate Institute.
“I really think time is not on anyone’s side. I really think the Europeans are losing patience,” he told Al Jazeera.
On Monday, German Chancellor Merz said, “The Iranian side is negotiating very skillfully,” El-Masri noted. He said this shows Trump is facing increased pressure from allies, who believe he (Trump) is dragging them into this mess and can’t clean it up.
“President Trump won’t be happy to hear that, and the Prime Minister is hitting President Trump where it hurts.”
