Mediators are racing to reach a ceasefire between the United States and Iran, experts say, hoping to end a cycle of retaliation that has become deadly and increasingly likely to spill over into a broader regional conflict.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghai acknowledged on Monday that mediators were actively trying to prevent further escalation, without providing further details.
His comments came as Axios reported that regional mediators including Qatar, Egypt, Pakistan and others have presented a proposal to both the United States and Iran to halt fighting for 10 days, giving them room to revive an interim memorandum of understanding (MoU) agreed last month. The plan also aims to restart commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, where competing military measures have been one of the biggest obstacles to negotiations.
But the diplomatic pressure comes as the United States and Iran appear to be moving in opposite directions. In recent days, the conflict has expanded beyond military targets, with increasing attacks on civilian infrastructure as both sides continue to harden their public stances.
The United States has further expanded its bombing campaign against Iran, and President Donald Trump has also promised that Iran will “pay a price” for the killing of several American soldiers. Meanwhile, Iran has stepped up attacks on ships and targets across the region.
The escalation follows a month of deterioration in relations since the United States and Iran signed a memorandum of understanding on February 28 that extended a cease-fire in April and set out a framework for negotiations aimed at ending the war that began with Israel and the United States’ attack on Iran. Since then, both governments have repeatedly accused them of violating the agreement.
The question now is whether the mediator can persuade one side to back out before military events override diplomacy. Here’s what you need to know:
What is being proposed?
Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesman Baghayei told reporters on Monday that the Iranian government had received “a proposal that was conveyed through a mediator.”
“I don’t want to go into details at this stage,” Baghai added, making it clear that any diplomatic efforts would continue in tandem with Iran’s military response.
The latest proposal is reportedly based on talks held between Oman, Iran and Qatar in Muscat on July 11, but which ultimately collapsed.
At its heart is the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway through which one-fifth of the world’s oil and gas passes during peacetime.
The reported plan would see the full reopening of the strait’s shipping lanes, the Iranian-approved northern passage, which is currently under a US naval blockade, and the US-backed southern passage, where ships have been under attack by Iran. The proposal would also halt military operations for 10 days to give negotiators time to salvage the memorandum.
Axios reports that regional officials are also discussing mechanisms to control future transit fees, including a joint management fund with the International Maritime Organization and allowing Iran to collect what one source described as “reasonable service fees” related to maritime security and environmental protection.
Does it actually work?
Simon Mabon, a professor of international relations at Lancaster University, said the memorandum was initially successful in reducing fighting because it was intentionally vague and gave the United States and Iran plenty of room to interpret it in a way acceptable to them.
But that flexibility is also a weakness, he noted. Mabon told Al Jazeera that the “different interpretations” of the “clearly moribund” agreement allowed each side to accuse the other of violating the agreement while claiming to be acting within it, ultimately contributing to its collapse.
“A new agreement will therefore require clearer commitments to prevent a recurrence of the same conflict,” he said.
The recent military escalation only complicates the situation.
Mabon said that while Iran still views maritime control of the Strait of Hormuz as one of its main powers, the deaths of three U.S. service members in the past week have increased pressure on President Trump for a strong response. Mabon said this risks trapping both governments in a cycle of retaliation and “getting caught in an escalation trap.”
But some analysts say there are still signs that the United States is trying to avoid a broader war even as it expands its air operations.
Alex Almeida, head of security at Horizon Engage, told Al Jazeera that while US attacks have expanded deeper into Iran, the “vast majority” of attacks are still “focused on Hormuz,” suggesting the White House is still trying to contain the conflict.
“We expect at least another week of U.S.-Iranian interaction in the Gulf and around Hormuz before new negotiations take place,” he said.
But Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible States and Strategy, said Iran has little incentive to return to negotiations while military operations continue.
“They see the United States not being able to achieve what it wants to achieve at the negotiating table and then going back to military action to improve the situation,” he told Al Jazeera.
“Diplomacy will not succeed until we commit ourselves to diplomacy and truly set aside military action and other efforts to shape the landscape,” Parsi said.
Is the window to peace closing?
With each new attack, experts warn, the conflict risks boiling over into a more dangerous war that will be harder to contain politically, because of the expansion of targets.
Iranian officials have been told that recent U.S. attacks have hit train stations and residential areas, as well as bridges, water facilities, food silos and other civilian infrastructure.
Meanwhile, the United States has expanded its operations beyond Iran’s southern coastline, striking targets deep inside the country and prompting Iranian retaliation across the region.
Following 10 consecutive nights of U.S. bombing, Iranian airstrikes have reportedly damaged desalination plants and power plants in Kuwait, as well as targeting Bahrain and Jordan, underscoring how exposed regional countries are to fighting.
Analysts also warn that the conflict could extend beyond the Gulf entirely. Yemen’s Iranian-allied Houthis have declared a naval blockade of Saudi ports, threatening to open a new front against the region’s energy infrastructure and some of the world’s busiest shipping lanes.
Mabon said the biggest danger could be that the conflict spread to other strategic waterways, including the Bab al-Mandeb, the southern gateway to the Red Sea.
He said a complete closure of the shipping route was a “significant measure with implications for the Straits” and would cause “further disruption to oil prices and global supply chains”.
Mabon also warned that Israel could emerge as a “potential spoiler” of diplomatic developments, citing elections scheduled for October and limited domestic support for the ceasefire.
And with the conflict showing no signs of abating, many fear that the space for diplomacy is shrinking.
“No matter how hard the mediators are working…I don’t think it will be enough unless there is a serious crackdown from both Iran and the United States,” Mabon said.
