In a readout issued by Downing Street, a spokesperson said the two leaders discussed the failed negotiations held in Pakistan over the weekend and agreed it was “vital” to maintain the ceasefire while seeking a path forward through dialogue.

Starmer, who recently returned from meetings in the Middle East, also said international partners were working to restore safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global energy transit route, and reaffirmed Britain’s commitment to Oman’s security.

UK Health Secretary Wes Streeting described the breakdown in talks as “disappointing,” while emphasizing that continued engagement remained necessary to achieve a sustainable end to the conflict.

Speaking to Sky News, he said diplomacy often requires persistence, adding that lack of immediate success did not diminish the value of ongoing negotiations.

Streeting also criticized comments made earlier by U.S. President Donald Trump during the crisis, calling them “extraordinary,” particularly remarks he said appeared to threaten Iranian civilization.

Separately, Australian Foreign Minister Penny Wong called for the continuation of the Middle East ceasefire and a return to negotiations, stating that the outcome of the Islamabad talks was disappointing but underscoring the need for further diplomatic efforts.

The statements come after high-level U.S.-Iran talks ended without agreement, prolonging uncertainty over a conflict that has disrupted regional stability and global energy markets.

Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar said it was “imperative” that both parties maintain their ceasefire commitments, adding that Islamabad would continue facilitating dialogue between Washington and Tehran following the inconclusive talks.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who led the American delegation, said the absence of a deal was “bad news for Iran much more than it’s bad news for the United States,” reiterating Washington’s demand for a firm commitment from Tehran not to pursue nuclear weapons capability.

He said the United States had made its “red lines” clear, including preventing Iran from acquiring both nuclear weapons and the means to rapidly develop them.

Iranian officials rejected the U.S. position, with state-linked Tasnim news agency reporting that “excessive” American demands had hindered progress. Tehran signaled that discussions would continue, with technical teams expected to exchange documents in follow-up engagements.

Iran’s parliamentary speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said the U.S. had failed to build trust during the talks despite what he described as “forward-looking” proposals from the Iranian side. He emphasized longstanding skepticism rooted in past negotiations, saying Washington must demonstrate credibility before progress can be made.

Iran’s foreign ministry also downplayed the outcome, stating that no agreement had been expected in a single session and expressing confidence that diplomatic contacts would continue with Pakistan and other regional actors.

Former Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif attributed the breakdown to what he called U.S. attempts to “dictate” terms, warning that negotiations with Iran would not succeed under unilateral conditions.

The Islamabad meeting marked the highest-level direct engagement between the United States and Iran in more than a decade and the most senior talks since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.

The discussions were aimed at halting a conflict that began over six weeks ago and has driven up global oil prices while threatening key maritime routes.Central to the negotiations was the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint for roughly one-fifth of global energy supplies.

The U.S. military said it was preparing to ensure safe navigation through the waterway, including mine-clearing operations, while Iranian state media denied any U.S. naval transit in the area.

Tehran has demanded control over the strait, war reparations, and broader ceasefire arrangements extending to regional theaters including Lebanon. U.S. officials have focused on securing freedom of navigation and curbing Iran’s nuclear enrichment capabilities.

The talks took place under tight security in Islamabad, where thousands of paramilitary forces were deployed. Pakistani officials described fluctuating tensions during the discussions, with “mood swings” and intermittent progress reported by sources familiar with the negotiations.

The Iranian delegation, which arrived dressed in black to mourn those killed in the conflict, also raised concerns about a U.S. airstrike on a school near a military compound, an incident the Pentagon has said is under investigation.

Despite the impasse, analysts noted the seniority and size of the Iranian delegation as an indication of Tehran’s willingness to engage, even as deep mistrust continues to define the diplomatic landscape.

The revised text, circulated by Bahrain, removes earlier provisions that would have allowed the use of force and instead urges states to coordinate “defensive” measures to ensure safe navigation, including escorting commercial vessels.

The vote comes amid more than five weeks of conflict triggered by U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran in late February, which has led Tehran to largely restrict passage through the strait, a key conduit for global energy supplies, sending oil prices sharply higher.

Diplomats said the watered-down version stands a better chance of adoption but its outcome remains uncertain. A resolution requires at least nine votes in favor and no vetoes from the five permanent members Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States.

Earlier drafts backed by Gulf states and Washington had included language authorizing “all defensive means necessary,” but faced resistance from China and Russia, prompting multiple revisions. China has argued that authorizing force risks escalation and has instead called for efforts to de-escalate the conflict.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said Beijing was prepared to work with Russia at the Security Council to help calm tensions in the Middle East, emphasizing that a ceasefire was the fundamental path to resolving the crisis.

Iran has signaled it seeks a lasting end to hostilities but has resisted pressure to reopen the strait, while U.S. President Donald Trump has warned of consequences if Tehran does not reach a deal by a self-imposed deadline.

The latest draft reflects a compromise effort to bridge divisions within the council while addressing growing concerns over disruptions to one of the world’s most critical maritime trade routes.

The report said any action would likely fall short of a full-scale invasion, instead involving special operations forces and conventional infantry targeting locations such as Kharg Island and coastal areas near the Strait of Hormuz, a critical corridor for global oil shipments.

Washington has already moved thousands of Marines to the Middle East amid the month-long conflict. The first of two contingents arrived on an amphibious assault ship on Friday, according to the U.S. military.

Additional deployments under consideration include forces from the 82nd Airborne Division, alongside approximately 5,000 Marines being repositioned to the region. These reinforcements would add to an estimated 50,000 U.S. troops already stationed across the Middle East, according to media reports.

U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said Washington could achieve its objectives without deploying ground troops but noted that forces were being positioned to give policymakers “maximum” flexibility.

Defense analysts cited in reports said limited operations could aim to secure maritime routes or seize key infrastructure such as Kharg Island, a major hub for Iran’s oil exports.

Military experts have cautioned that even limited ground incursions could lead to prolonged engagement, raising the risk of a broader conflict and increased casualties.

Concerns also persist over the economic implications of instability around the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant share of global energy supplies passes.

No final decision on ground operations has been announced, and U.S. officials have not publicly confirmed the scope or timing of any potential action.

The statement, issued by Iran’s foreign ministry and shared with IMO member states and non-governmental organizations, said vessels that do not “participate in or support acts of aggression” against Iran would be permitted safe passage through the strategic waterway, subject to adherence to safety and security regulations.

However, it specified that vessels, equipment, and assets belonging to what it described as “aggressor parties” including the United States and Israel would not qualify for what it termed “innocent or non-hostile passage.

”Iran said responsibility for any disruption or escalation in the Strait of Hormuz lay with Washington and Tel Aviv, accusing them of waging an “unlawful and destabilising war” that has heightened risks to international shipping and regional stability.

The statement reflects Tehran’s position as tensions remain elevated following the outbreak of war triggered by U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran on February 28.

The Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints, has been effectively closed since the escalation, contributing to sharp increases in global oil and gas prices.

Iran’s conditional reopening for select vessels introduces limited operational clarity for commercial shipping, though the exclusion of U.S. and Israeli-linked assets underscores the continuing strategic and geopolitical risks in the region.

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told lawmakers in Berlin that while Iran must not threaten regional stability, Washington had failed to present a credible plan or request European participation. “To this day, there is no convincing plan for how this operation could succeed,” he said, adding that the United States had neither coordinated with allies nor outlined the necessity of their involvement.

His defense minister, Boris Pistorius, struck a similarly firm tone earlier in the week, stating, “This is not our war, we have not started it,” underscoring Berlin’s reluctance to be drawn into a widening confrontation linked to U.S. and Israeli actions.

French President Emmanuel Macron echoed Germany’s position, saying Paris was not a party to the conflict, reflecting broader unease among European capitals about both the rationale and execution of the U.S. initiative.

The near closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery for global energy shipments, has heightened economic concerns, placing pressure on governments to respond to rising risks to trade and supply chains. However, European leaders have signaled that any response must be coordinated, measured, and grounded in clear strategic objectives.

Merz, who has long advocated strong transatlantic ties, adopted notably direct language, highlighting a shift in tone among U.S. allies faced with what they perceive as unilateral decision-making in Washington.

Despite differing national interests, European leaders have sought to maintain a unified front, prioritizing diplomatic coherence while managing relations with an unpredictable U.S. administration.

Officials across the region have emphasized the importance of avoiding escalation, even as they acknowledge the broader security implications of instability in the Gulf. Their stance suggests a recalibration of transatlantic dynamics, with greater emphasis on consultation and multilateral engagement.

The divergence comes at a time when global markets remain sensitive to disruptions in energy flows, and policymakers weigh the risks of deeper military entanglement against economic and security considerations.

The message, delivered by Russian Ambassador Sergey Kozlov to Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Waleed Elkhereiji, focused on strengthening bilateral relations and fostering cooperation across multiple sectors.

During the meeting, officials reviewed the depth of collaboration between the two nations, emphasizing shared interests in regional stability, economic development, and international diplomacy.

This exchange reflects the ongoing commitment of both countries to maintain strong, constructive engagement on global matters.

The message from President Putin reaffirmed Russia’s interest in enhancing collaboration with Saudi Arabia on energy, trade, investment, and technology, supporting efforts to promote mutual growth and prosperity.

Both sides discussed opportunities for expanding cooperation in sectors such as oil and gas, renewable energy, infrastructure projects, and joint industrial initiatives.

Saudi Deputy Foreign Minister Waleed Elkhereiji and the Russian Ambassador also exchanged perspectives on regional developments, with an emphasis on coordinated diplomatic efforts to address challenges in the Middle East and beyond.

This dialogue illustrates the proactive approach of Riyadh and Moscow in maintaining dialogue and constructive engagement at both political and economic levels.

The communication underlines the importance of Saudi-Russia relations in contributing to global energy security, with both countries playing key roles in stabilizing markets and ensuring steady supplies of oil and gas.

Collaborative strategies to address market fluctuations and energy transition initiatives were central to the discussions.

Officials also acknowledged the strategic value of enhancing cultural and educational exchanges between the two nations, promoting people-to-people connections, and strengthening mutual understanding.

These initiatives contribute to a foundation of trust and long-term partnership.

The meeting further highlighted Saudi Arabia and Russia’s shared commitment to international peace, security, and economic development, with both countries emphasizing their role in facilitating dialogue and cooperation within regional and multilateral frameworks.

Strategic coordination in forums such as the United Nations and G20 was discussed to address pressing global challenges.

In addition, the conversation stressed the importance of advancing technological cooperation, including investments in digital infrastructure, innovation, and scientific research.

Collaborative projects in these areas are expected to enhance competitiveness and drive sustainable economic growth in both nations.

Saudi-Russia relations have a strong history of collaboration on energy policy, regional security, and international diplomacy. This recent exchange demonstrates continued alignment and mutual support, fostering stability and prosperity in the region.

Both nations reaffirmed their intention to pursue initiatives that strengthen bilateral economic ties and advance shared strategic interests.

The discussion also addressed opportunities for expanding trade, investment, and joint ventures across various sectors, reinforcing the commitment to diversified economic cooperation.

Enhanced cooperation in finance, tourism, and infrastructure development was noted as a key priority for future collaboration.

This engagement signals confidence in the resilience and durability of Saudi-Russia relations, ensuring that both nations remain active partners in shaping regional and global policy.

The message exchange exemplifies diplomatic harmony and strategic foresight, contributing positively to international relations.

Through continued dialogue and cooperation, Saudi Arabia and Russia aim to advance initiatives that promote sustainable development, economic diversification, and global stability.

These efforts underscore the shared vision of both nations for a prosperous and secure international environment.

The move reflects a broader approach that places sanctions enforcement and financial pressure at the center of Washington’s engagement with Caracas, while keeping military options in reserve as a deterrent rather than a first response.

Senior officials have indicated that the objective of the policy is to restrict revenue streams that sustain the Venezuelan government, encouraging political and economic reforms through sustained international pressure.

By concentrating on maritime interdiction linked to sanctioned oil shipments, the administration aims to strengthen the effectiveness of existing sanctions and ensure they are applied consistently and credibly.

The strategy underscores a preference for non-kinetic tools in achieving geopolitical goals, aligning economic statecraft with international regulatory mechanisms and multilateral expectations.

Officials have emphasized that the approach is designed to avoid unnecessary escalation, focusing instead on controlled enforcement actions that reinforce diplomatic messaging.

The United States has expanded its naval and security presence in the Caribbean to support monitoring and compliance efforts, reinforcing the seriousness of the sanctions regime without framing it as an act of war.

This presence also reflects long-standing commitments to regional security, counter-narcotics operations, and maritime stability, which remain integral to U.S. policy in the hemisphere.

Interdictions of sanctioned vessels have been presented as lawful enforcement actions aimed at upholding international sanctions rather than targeting the Venezuelan population.

U.S. policymakers have stressed that humanitarian considerations remain central, with exemptions and channels maintained for essential goods and humanitarian assistance.

The quarantine approach draws on historical precedents where calibrated economic pressure was used to shape outcomes while preserving diplomatic space for negotiation.

Officials believe that sustained enforcement could encourage constructive dialogue and meaningful concessions, reducing the likelihood of prolonged instability.

At international forums, the United States has reiterated its position that sanctions enforcement is a legitimate tool to promote accountability and responsible governance.

The policy also reflects coordination across government agencies, combining defense capabilities, coast guard operations, and diplomatic engagement into a unified strategy.

Observers note that the emphasis on economic tools demonstrates a broader shift toward modern pressure mechanisms that rely on financial systems and trade controls.

By clearly articulating its focus, the administration aims to provide predictability to allies and partners involved in maritime trade and regional security.

The strategy sends a signal that compliance with international norms remains a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, supported by measured enforcement actions.

While challenges remain, officials express confidence that sustained economic pressure can create incentives for peaceful resolution and political transition.

The administration continues to frame the policy as time-bound and outcome-oriented, leaving room for reassessment based on developments on the ground.

Overall, the approach highlights Washington’s intent to pursue stability through pressure balanced with restraint, emphasizing long-term regional security and diplomatic solutions.

Officials confirmed that the U.S. Coast Guard is actively monitoring and pursuing a vessel believed to be operating as part of an illicit network designed to evade international sanctions, reflecting heightened vigilance in international waters.

This operation follows recent successful interceptions and highlights the United States’ determination to ensure transparency and compliance within global maritime and energy markets.

Authorities emphasized that the pursuit is part of a legal and judicial process, aimed at upholding international norms rather than disrupting legitimate commerce or lawful energy supply chains.

The vessel in question is reportedly operating under a false flag and is subject to a judicial seizure order, signaling the seriousness with which enforcement agencies are addressing sanctions violations.

Maritime security experts note that such actions contribute to safer sea lanes, clearer accountability, and reduced risks associated with unregulated or covert shipping activities.

By targeting sanctioned “dark fleet” operations, U.S. authorities aim to discourage practices that undermine international law, environmental safety, and fair competition in the global energy sector.

The Coast Guard’s approach allows for multiple methods of engagement, including close monitoring, interception, and coordination with international partners, ensuring flexibility while prioritizing safety.

Analysts suggest that these operations also send a clear message to global markets that compliance with established rules remains essential for stability and trust.

The vessel being pursued was reportedly empty at the time of approach, reducing immediate environmental or supply risks and demonstrating careful timing in enforcement actions.

Officials have stressed that these measures are calibrated to avoid unnecessary disruption to global oil prices or consumer markets, maintaining confidence among traders and energy-importing nations.

Economic advisors reiterated that the number of vessels involved is limited, and that enforcement actions are focused on black-market operations rather than legitimate oil trade.

Early market responses showed modest oil price movements, reflecting a balanced view among investors who see the actions as targeted rather than escalatory.

Energy analysts note that consistent enforcement can, over time, contribute to more predictable and transparent energy flows by discouraging illicit supply chains.

The broader strategy also aligns with international efforts to address sanctions evasion, money laundering, and unsafe shipping practices that can threaten maritime workers and coastal communities.

From a security perspective, increased monitoring enhances situational awareness in key shipping corridors, supporting regional stability and cooperative maritime governance.

U.S. officials have highlighted that lawful energy trade remains welcome, and that enforcement actions are designed to uphold rules rather than restrict legitimate economic activity.

Observers point out that clarity in enforcement can reduce long-term geopolitical risk by establishing firm expectations and reducing gray-zone activities at sea.

As global energy demand continues to evolve, such measures reinforce the importance of accountability, transparency, and rule-based trade in maintaining market confidence.

The latest operation reflects a proactive approach to safeguarding international waters, protecting lawful commerce, and reinforcing trust in the global maritime system.

Washington issues new licenses allowing companies to negotiate for Lukoil’s foreign assets under strict conditions that ensure full separation from the Russian oil giant and protect the energy security of allied nations.

The United States has opened the door for discussions on the potential sale of Lukoil’s international assets, granting temporary approval for companies to engage in talks despite ongoing sanctions.

The move marks a significant step in managing the consequences of sanctions imposed on major Russian energy firms as the war in Ukraine continues.

Washington issued new licenses that allow interested buyers to communicate with Lukoil until December 13 as they explore options for acquiring its overseas operations.

These assets have faced growing operational strain following sanctions, which have limited the company’s ability to manage and operate facilities abroad.

Officials emphasized that no sale will be approved unless the transaction fully severs all ties between the foreign assets and Lukoil.

To meet those conditions, any funds generated from an approved sale must be placed into a restricted escrow account that the company cannot access while sanctions remain in place.

The US also permitted business dealings with Lukoil-linked entities in Bulgaria until April 29, 2026.
Bulgaria welcomed the decision, calling it an important measure that supports energy stability and ensures continued refinery operations without disruption to consumers or businesses.

Britain has also granted similar authorizations for Lukoil’s Bulgarian operations, including the Burgas refinery, which plays a key role in meeting national energy needs.

Officials stated that these approvals are designed to safeguard energy supplies for partner nations while ensuring Russia cannot derive benefit from the activity.

Additional licenses were issued to allow transactions involving the Caspian Pipeline Consortium and the Tengizchevroil project, both of which include participation from Lukoil alongside major international energy companies.

These projects transport significant volumes of crude oil from Kazakhstan, and officials noted that maintaining continuity is critical to global supply.

Interest in purchasing Lukoil’s international assets has been rising, with multiple firms evaluating potential bids.

Among them is US-based Carlyle, which has been reviewing options tied to the possible acquisition, according to sources familiar with the ongoing considerations.

Analysts say that some firms are more likely than others to receive regulatory approval due to their operational backgrounds and standing with US authorities.

Earlier this year, another buyer withdrew from talks after concerns were raised about its suitability, highlighting the level of scrutiny applied to the approval process.

Several energy companies and state-backed entities across Europe and Asia are also monitoring the situation closely. Potential bidders reportedly include Kazakhstan’s national oil company and a major European energy producer, demonstrating the wide-reaching interest generated by the opportunity.

Lukoil’s overseas holdings include multiple refineries across Europe, stakes in oilfields in Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, as well as a broad retail fuel network.

These operations amounted to an estimated value of around $22 billion based on recent disclosures, making it one of the most significant asset packages currently under discussion in global energy markets.

Legal experts note that while companies may engage in detailed discussions under the new license, final approval for any acquisition will still require a separate authorization.

This process ensures complete compliance with US sanctions rules and guarantees that there is no residual benefit to Lukoil or the Russian government.

The new approvals reflect an attempt to manage the strategic implications of sanctions while maintaining energy security for partner nations.

As conversations proceed, the outcome of these negotiations could reshape portions of the global energy landscape, especially in regions where Lukoil has long maintained a major presence.