Trump indicated the pause was intended to create diplomatic space for negotiations, signaling a possible shift toward a negotiated resolution in the strategically vital waterway, a key global oil transit route.

The decision comes amid heightened tensions linked to the ongoing Iran conflict, which has disrupted shipping flows and contributed to increased energy costs. Despite the pause in operational activity, the continued enforcement of the blockade suggests that pressure on the situation will be maintained while talks proceed.

The Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of the world’s oil supply passes, has remained at the center of geopolitical and economic concerns, with recent incidents underscoring the risks to commercial shipping and global energy markets.

US officials have not disclosed details of the proposed agreement or the parties involved, and no timeline has been provided for the duration of the pause.

The truce, which began at midnight local time, marks a significant step in diplomatic efforts linked to a broader regional de-escalation involving tensions between the United States and . However, the Lebanese military said Israeli actions in the south constituted breaches of the ceasefire and urged residents to delay their return.

Despite the warnings, convoys of civilians were seen heading south toward their homes, with traffic building along coastal routes and damaged infrastructure, including bridges hit during recent hostilities. Residents cited strong attachment to their homes as a driving force behind their return.

International reactions to the truce were broadly supportive. The Kremlin welcomed the agreement, expressing hope it would prevent renewed clashes, while called for its continuation and urged both sides to uphold their commitments. also endorsed the ceasefire, describing it as a step toward lasting peace, while Iran’s foreign ministry framed it as part of a wider understanding tied to regional de-escalation.

The conflict in Lebanon intensified in early March when launched rocket attacks toward Israel, triggering a series of Israeli strikes. Fighting continued until shortly before the truce took effect, with casualties reported on both sides.

Under the ceasefire framework, mediated with US involvement, Israel retains the right to act against perceived imminent threats, while Lebanon is expected, with international support, to prevent Hezbollah from carrying out attacks. Israeli Prime Minister said the agreement could open the door to a broader peace arrangement but reiterated that disarmament of Hezbollah remains a key condition.

US President said he had spoken with both Israeli and Lebanese leaders ahead of the truce and suggested the possibility of high-level talks in Washington in the coming days, a development that could mark a significant diplomatic milestone if realised.

The ceasefire remains fragile, with both sides maintaining heightened alert levels as the situation on the ground continues to evolve.

United Arab Emirates presidential adviser Anwar Gargash said the UAE had emerged stronger from the conflict, despite efforts to avoid escalation.

“The UAE emerged victorious from a war we sincerely sought to avoid,” Gargash wrote on X, adding that the country was better positioned to navigate regional complexities and influence future developments.

In Oman, officials stressed the importance of mediation and sustained engagement, with the foreign minister pledging support for initiatives aimed at achieving “strong and enduring regional security.”

Omani authorities urged Washington and Tehran to pursue serious negotiations to secure a durable peace.Saudi Arabia also backed diplomatic efforts, with its foreign ministry emphasizing the need for an agreement that addresses underlying causes of instability and long-term threats to regional security.

The responses highlight a broader regional push to consolidate the ceasefire into a lasting settlement, amid concerns over the potential for renewed tensions and the wider impact on Middle East stability.

The report, citing Department of Defense officials, said the proposed deployment could include infantry units and armored assets, reflecting a broader effort to reinforce the U.S. posture in a region already on heightened alert amid the ongoing Iran conflic.

The potential troop increase would add to a growing U.S. presence in the region. The Pentagon is preparing to send at least 1,000 soldiers from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division, according to earlier reporting by the Associated Press.

This would come alongside approximately 5,000 Marines being repositioned to the Middle East, on top of an existing force of around 50,000 U.S. personnel.The incremental buildup has fueled speculation that Washington is positioning itself for possible limited ground operations tied to strategic objectives linked to Iran’s energy infrastructure and regional waterways.

Analysts say U.S. ground forces could be capable of securing key maritime chokepoints or energy facilities, but warn of the potential for a prolonged and costly engagement. Mick Mulroy, a former deputy assistant secretary of defense, said that while such operations are feasible, the broader question remains whether they are strategically justified.

He noted that diplomacy remains the preferred pathway, though its success depends on both sides demonstrating willingness to compromise.

Trump said on Thursday that Iran had allowed several Pakistan-flagged oil tankers to transit a key maritime route, describing the move as a possible positive signal in the context of ongoing tensions.

The administration continues to balance military preparedness with diplomatic outreach, as indirect contacts between Washington and Tehran raise the prospect of negotiations even as force levels in the region expand.