The announcement came a day after talks in Pakistan ended without agreement, underscoring persistent divisions over terms to end a conflict launched on Feb. 28 by the United States and Israel. The blockade is aimed at pressuring Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and accept a broader settlement addressing its nuclear and missile programs, as well as its regional activities.

Trump indicated that diplomatic channels remain open, saying Iran had reached out to explore a possible resolution. “We’ve been called by the right people … and they want to work a deal,” he told reporters outside the White House.Iran signaled conditional openness to negotiations.

Judiciary chief Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei said discussions must proceed on the basis of “principles and logic,” while other officials warned that Tehran would respond if the situation escalates.The blockade drew sharp reactions from Iran, which threatened countermeasures targeting ports across the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, raising the risk that the two-week ceasefire declared earlier could collapse before its April 22 expiry.

At the core of the dispute remain differences over Iran’s nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy corridor through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply typically passes. Its closure has already disrupted markets and driven up oil prices.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who led the American delegation in the recent talks, said Iran had not provided assurances it would refrain from pursuing nuclear weapons capability. Tehran has long denied such intentions while defending its right to civilian nuclear development, including uranium enrichment.

Iran’s negotiating position, articulated by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, emphasized sovereignty over the strait, an end to hostilities, and compensation for wartime damage.

Iranian officials also dismissed the blockade as exaggerated, with parliamentary spokesperson Ebrahim Rezaei describing it as “more bluffing than reality.”Pakistan has indicated it may facilitate further dialogue, with Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar expressing willingness to host another round of talks, though no timeline has been confirmed.

Both sides have maintained firm public positions, with Trump warning that any Iranian attempt to challenge the blockade would be met with force, while Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei said the measure risked further destabilizing the global economy.

The announcement came a day after talks in Pakistan ended without agreement, underscoring persistent divisions over terms to end a conflict launched on Feb. 28 by the United States and Israel. The blockade is aimed at pressuring Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and accept a broader settlement addressing its nuclear and missile programs, as well as its regional activities.

Trump indicated that diplomatic channels remain open, saying Iran had reached out to explore a possible resolution. “We’ve been called by the right people and they want to work a deal,” he told reporters outside the White House.

Iran signaled conditional openness to negotiations. Judiciary chief Gholam Hossein Mohseni Ejei said discussions must proceed on the basis of “principles and logic,” while other officials warned that Tehran would respond if the situation escalates.

The blockade drew sharp reactions from Iran, which threatened countermeasures targeting ports across the Arabian Gulf and Gulf of Oman, raising the risk that the two-week ceasefire declared earlier could collapse before its April 22 expiry.

At the core of the dispute remain differences over Iran’s nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy corridor through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply typically passes. Its closure has already disrupted markets and driven up oil prices.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance, who led the American delegation in the recent talks, said Iran had not provided assurances it would refrain from pursuing nuclear weapons capability. Tehran has long denied such intentions while defending its right to civilian nuclear development, including uranium enrichment.

Iran’s negotiating position, articulated by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, emphasized sovereignty over the strait, an end to hostilities, and compensation for wartime damage.

Iranian officials also dismissed the blockade as exaggerated, with parliamentary spokesperson Ebrahim Rezaei describing it as “more bluffing than reality.”
Pakistan has indicated it may facilitate further dialogue, with Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar expressing willingness to host another round of talks, though no timeline has been confirmed.

Both sides have maintained firm public positions, with Trump warning that any Iranian attempt to challenge the blockade would be met with force, while Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei said the measure risked further destabilizing the global economy.

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.

Witkoff, speaking during a cabinet meeting, confirmed for the first time that the United States had passed the proposal via Pakistan, which is facilitating indirect communication between the two sides.

He said the effort sought to present Iran with what he described as a critical juncture, warning that failure to engage could lead to further escalation.

Germany’s foreign minister Johann Wadephul said the United States and Iran had already held indirect contacts and were preparing for a potential face-to-face meeting. He told Deutschlandfunk radio that such a meeting could take place “very soon” in Pakistan, though no official date was disclosed.

Pakistan’s role as a conduit underscores the absence of direct diplomatic ties between Washington and Tehran, with both sides relying on intermediaries to exchange proposals amid heightened regional tensions.

lAccording to the details outlined by Witkoff, the U.S. proposal includes stringent conditions on Iran’s nuclear activities. These include a prohibition on weaponization, dismantling of the Fordow nuclear facility, cessation of uranium enrichment, a ban on stockpiling nuclear material, and the transfer of enriched uranium to the United States.

Iranian authorities are currently reviewing the proposal, though no formal response has been announced.

The diplomatic push comes against the backdrop of an ongoing Middle East conflict that has drawn in multiple regional actors and intensified scrutiny of Iran’s military and nuclear posture. U.S. officials have framed the proposal as part of a broader effort to reduce hostilities and prevent further destabilization.

Witkoff said the outcome would depend on whether Tehran views the current moment as an opportunity to shift course, adding that discussions remain at a preliminary stage.

The announcement comes amid a four-week conflict involving the United States, Israel and Iran that has killed thousands and disrupted global energy markets, driving up oil and liquefied natural gas prices and intensifying inflation concerns worldwide.

Deadline extended amid conflicting claimsTrump said talks with Iran were “going very well” and announced a 10-day pause on threatened attacks on Iranian energy facilities, extending an earlier five-day halt declared on March 23.

The pause is set to expire on April 6 at 2000 EDT.Iran, however, said it was not engaged in direct talks with Washington, and officials indicated the U.S. had not clarified who it was negotiating with, as senior Iranian leadership has been significantly affected by the conflict.

Mediators cited by the Wall Street Journal said Tehran had not requested the 10-day pause, while Trump told Fox News that Iran had sought a shorter, seven-day reprieve. There was no immediate confirmation from Iranian authorities.

The conflict has sharply disrupted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical artery carrying roughly a fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas. Oil prices have surged about 40% since hostilities began, with Brent crude rising above $105 per barrel.

Iran has warned it would retaliate against energy infrastructure in the Gulf if U.S. strikes proceed, raising concerns about tit-for-tat attacks on civilian facilities that could further destabilize energy markets and regional economies.Global equities have also come under pressure, with major indexes declining amid uncertainty over the conflict’s trajectory.

The Pentagon is considering deploying up to 10,000 additional troops to the Middle East, according to U.S. media reports, while also confirming the use of uncrewed drone speedboats in operations against Iran.

Trump reiterated that the United States could escalate pressure if Iran fails to comply with demands, including reopening the Strait of Hormuz and curbing its nuclear programme, and said control of Iran’s oil resources remained an option without elaborating.

An Iranian official said a 15-point U.S. proposal conveyed through Pakistan was reviewed by senior leadership and deemed unacceptable as it primarily served U.S. and Israeli interests.

The proposal reportedly included demands to dismantle Iran’s nuclear programme, limit missile capabilities and alter control over key waterways.

Pakistan’s foreign minister said indirect communication channels remain open, with Turkey and Egypt also involved in mediation efforts.Iran has hardened its negotiating stance, seeking guarantees against future military action, compensation for war damage and greater control over maritime routes, while also insisting that Lebanon be included in any ceasefire framework.

Meanwhile, hostilities continued on multiple fronts, with Iran launching missile strikes on Israeli cities including Tel Aviv and Haifa, and Israeli strikes hitting targets in southern and central Iran, resulting in civilian casualties and infrastructure damage.

Trump told reporters at the White House that U.S. officials were engaged with “the right people” in Iran and suggested Tehran was eager to reach an agreement.

A source familiar with the matter confirmed that Washington had transmitted a multi-point proposal aimed at halting the conflict, now in its fourth week following U.S. and Israeli strikes launched on February 28.Iranian authorities denied that direct negotiations were underway.

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf dismissed reports of talks as “fake news,” underscoring persistent gaps between public positions and diplomatic signals.

According to media reports cited by regional outlets, the U.S. proposal includes provisions for dismantling Iran’s nuclear program, ending support for proxy groups, and reopening the Strait of Hormuz. A month-long ceasefire has also been discussed to facilitate negotiations, though no official confirmation of those terms has been issued by Washington.

Trump said Iran had made a “valuable concession” linked to non-nuclear energy and maritime transit through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical chokepoint through which roughly 20% of global oil supply typically flows. He did not provide details.

Iran informed the United Nations Security Council and the International Maritime Organization that non-hostile vessels could transit the strait if coordinated with Iranian authorities, according to a note seen by Reuters. The waterway has effectively been shut since the outbreak of hostilities, triggering a sharp global energy supply disruption.

Despite diplomatic signals, military activity has continued on all sides. Two sources said the United States is preparing to deploy thousands of troops from the Army’s 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East, adding to approximately 50,000 U.S. personnel already stationed in the region.

The deployment would accelerate a broader military buildup, heightening concerns among analysts and regional actors that the conflict could become prolonged even as negotiations proceed.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said his government was willing to host talks between Washington and Tehran, expressing support for dialogue aimed at achieving a comprehensive settlement.

A Pakistani government source said discussions about a potential meeting were at an advanced stage, though no agreement had been finalized.Pakistan maintains longstanding ties with Iran and has recently strengthened engagement with the United States, positioning itself as a potential intermediary.

The latest developments come a day after Trump delayed threatened strikes on Iranian power infrastructure, citing “productive” discussions, while Oman, which has acted as a mediator, previously indicated that progress had been made in earlier negotiations before the outbreak of conflict.

In a public message, Trump said time was running out for diplomacy and stressed that the United States would not tolerate Iran pursuing nuclear weapons. He framed negotiations as the only viable path forward, warning that failure to act would bring consequences far worse than previous military actions.

Trump referred to earlier strikes carried out last year as a clear signal of US resolve. He suggested that Tehran should view those attacks as a warning rather than an isolated episode, emphasizing that future responses would be more forceful if Iran ignored US demands.

Iran reacted swiftly, rejecting the tone of the warning while insisting it remained open to dialogue under certain conditions. Officials said Iran would defend itself vigorously if attacked, arguing that threats and military pressure would not force it into submission.

Iran’s mission to the United Nations pushed back by recalling past US military interventions in the region. It highlighted the heavy financial and human costs of wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, suggesting that confrontation had historically brought little stability or benefit.

Tehran’s foreign ministry also indicated that no recent talks had taken place with US envoys and denied requesting negotiations. Iranian officials stressed that any dialogue would need to be based on mutual respect rather than pressure or ultimatums.

The situation has been further complicated by the movement of US naval forces into the Middle East. American officials confirmed that a carrier strike group had arrived in the region, a move widely seen as a show of force amid rising tensions.

Washington says the deployment is meant to deter escalation and protect US interests and allies. Iran, however, views the presence of additional US military assets as provocative and indicative of hostile intentions.

Tensions between the two countries have also been fueled by recent unrest inside Iran. Protests over economic hardship and political repression drew international attention, with Trump repeatedly condemning Tehran’s response and warning of possible intervention.

Although large scale demonstrations have subsided, the crackdown has left deep scars and contributed to worsening relations. US officials have linked their hardline stance partly to concerns over human rights and internal stability in Iran.

Trump has consistently argued that his administration will act decisively if Iran resumes activities linked to nuclear weapons development. He has pointed to earlier airstrikes on nuclear facilities as evidence that threats are not merely rhetorical.

Iranian leaders maintain that their nuclear program is peaceful and accuse Washington of undermining diplomacy by withdrawing from previous agreements. They argue that sanctions and military pressure have only deepened mistrust and hardened positions on both sides.

Regional analysts warn that the exchange of threats increases the risk of miscalculation. With military forces in close proximity and diplomatic channels limited, even minor incidents could escalate rapidly.

At the same time, some observers believe the rhetoric is intended to force negotiations rather than trigger conflict. Trump has often used strong language as leverage, while Iran has historically balanced defiance with selective engagement.

The coming weeks may prove decisive in determining whether the standoff moves toward talks or further confrontation. Both sides face domestic and international pressures that could shape their next steps.

As uncertainty grows, global markets and regional governments are watching closely. Any escalation between the United States and Iran would have far reaching implications for security, energy supplies and diplomatic stability across the Middle East.

During a visit to the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, President Pezeshkian met with senior officials and scientists to review the status of the nation’s nuclear program.

He reiterated Tehran’s long-standing position that its nuclear pursuits are dedicated to advancing medical, technological, and energy-related research, as well as improving the welfare of Iranian citizens.

“Destroying buildings and factories will not create a problem for us; we will rebuild and with greater strength,” Pezeshkian stated, referring to facilities damaged in previous strikes.

He highlighted that Iran remains committed to its sovereignty and self-reliance in science and technology, despite facing external pressures and sanctions over the years.

In June, the United States carried out airstrikes on several Iranian nuclear sites, claiming that the facilities were part of a weapons-related program.

Washington argued that these actions were necessary to prevent nuclear proliferation in the region. However, Tehran rejected the allegations, insisting that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful and civilian applications, including medical research, energy production, and agricultural development.

U.S. President Donald Trump, commenting on the situation, warned that Washington would consider additional military measures if Iran attempted to rebuild the targeted facilities.

In response, Pezeshkian reaffirmed Iran’s right to develop and maintain nuclear technology within the framework of international law and under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

“Our program is not designed for war or confrontation,” Pezeshkian said. “It is all intended for solving the problems of the people, for health, for research, and for the country’s progress.”

Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization has long played a central role in advancing the country’s scientific and industrial capacity. Officials said that the reconstruction process would focus on modernizing infrastructure and enhancing the safety and efficiency of nuclear facilities.

International observers have noted that Iran continues to cooperate with the IAEA on monitoring and verification activities. The agency has previously confirmed that Iran’s declared nuclear materials remain under safeguards, though recent tensions have raised questions about the future of diplomatic engagement between Tehran and world powers.

President Pezeshkian’s administration has signaled its willingness to engage in dialogue, provided that the nation’s rights to peaceful nuclear energy are respected. Iranian officials argue that scientific independence is vital for national development and that international collaboration, rather than confrontation, is the best path toward regional stability.

Economic experts in Tehran believe that rebuilding the nuclear infrastructure could also create new opportunities for investment in science and technology, energy production, and education. The government has expressed its intent to involve local universities and research institutions in the process, aiming to foster innovation and create jobs for young scientists.

Observers say that Pezeshkian’s remarks reflect a broader vision of national resilience, focusing on rebuilding essential facilities while avoiding escalation with other countries. The president’s tone appeared measured, emphasizing progress, cooperation, and Iran’s adherence to international norms.

As reconstruction efforts begin, Iranian officials have called for an atmosphere of mutual respect and dialogue to ensure that nuclear technology continues to serve peaceful and humanitarian purposes. The government has also invited international experts to observe parts of the process, signaling a desire for greater transparency.

While political tensions remain high, Pezeshkian’s visit to the Atomic Energy Organization underlined a message of determination and stability. “Our strength lies in knowledge and the unity of our people,” he said. “With science and cooperation, we can overcome challenges and move forward toward a more secure and developed Iran.”

The coming months are expected to determine how Iran’s rebuilding plans unfold, as both domestic initiatives and international diplomacy play a role in shaping the next phase of its nuclear program. For now, Tehran’s leadership insists that the nation’s goals remain rooted in peaceful development, resilience, and the advancement of science for future generations.

The decision, made by the UN Security Council, reflects the international community’s continued focus on ensuring that Iran’s nuclear program remains exclusively peaceful. While sanctions are restored, the European powers and UN officials underscore that diplomacy remains the primary path forward.

European Union foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas highlighted that the EU will implement these measures responsibly while maintaining channels for constructive negotiations with Tehran. “Our goal is not only to uphold international agreements but to provide space for dialogue and mutual understanding,” Kallas said.

Iran has signaled its willingness to engage in consultations, recalling ambassadors to Britain, France, and Germany for discussions. President Masoud Pezeshkian reaffirmed Iran’s commitment to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, stressing that the country remains dedicated to international cooperation and peaceful nuclear development.

Diplomatic avenues remain open, with Britain, France, and Germany offering opportunities for a long-term agreement. They called on Iran to continue talks, ensure access for UN inspectors, and address concerns regarding enriched uranium, all in good faith. The message from the international community is clear: sanctions are a temporary measure intended to guide Iran toward constructive engagement, not to hinder dialogue.

The United States reiterated its support for a diplomatic solution. Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasized that direct negotiations, conducted transparently and in good faith, are the best way to achieve sustainable outcomes for the Iranian people and the global community.

While the UN measures include temporary restrictions on certain nuclear-related activities, arms, and travel, they are designed to strengthen frameworks for cooperation rather than isolate Tehran. Officials stress that responsible implementation of these measures can enhance regional stability, reinforce international norms, and ultimately support Iran in achieving a secure and peaceful nuclear program.

This renewed focus on diplomacy, verification, and cooperation represents a positive step forward in international relations, ensuring that Iran remains a constructive partner on the global stage while maintaining peace and security in the region.

To achieve lasting cessation of hostilities, three core issues must be resolved – and resolved fully, not cosmetically.

Some of my friends keep asking me: “What’s going to happen this July and August?” And I tell them: guys, who do you think I am? A psychic? You think I’ve got a crystal ball stashed in my office?

No. I’m just a simple business owner based in the GCC. I don’t claim supernatural insight. But I do try to form slightly more informed opinions than the average person, mostly because I’ve been observing this region’s conflicts since I was nine years old. At this point, it’s practically an occupational hazard.

So here’s the breakdown:

The fundamentals for a permanent ceasefire in the region simply do not exist yet. And no, this isn’t just about Iran and Israel. This is about Hezbollah, the Houthis, Hamas, the Iraqi militias, and the enormous American military buildup underway. You cannot solve the symptoms while the disease is metastasizing.

To achieve lasting cessation of hostilities, three core issues must be resolved – and resolved fully, not cosmetically.

1. Nuclear Enrichment Must Stop – On Iranian Soil

Even after suspected Israeli strikes crippled parts of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, Tehran still retains: the knowledge, the will, and likely the determination to restart enrichment. That’s not speculation; that’s their posture.

Unless there’s a complete, verifiable, internationally inspected cessation of enrichment on Iranian soil, there’s no foundation for trust. No amount of diplomacy can paper over that risk.

2. Ballistic Missiles Must Be Dismantled

We’re not talking about short-range battlefield rockets.

We’re talking: MRBMs (Medium-Range Ballistic Missiles), IRBMs (Intermediate-Range), ICBMs (Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles)

These aren’t for defence – they’re for deterrence and leverage. And the regime is fiercely protective of them. But if these remain, no ceasefire will ever be permanent. Full dismantlement isn’t optional; it’s mandatory.

3. The Proxy Network Must Be Demobilized

This is the elephant in the room: Iran’s proxy ecosystem – roughly 700,000 fighters across 90+ militias.

The core pillars: Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Houthis in Yemen, the Popular Mobilization Forces and others in Iraq.

These groups are not just “regional influencers.” They are armed non-state actors that destabilize multiple sovereign countries. And Iran’s biggest mistake in recent years? Using the Houthis to interfere with global trade and Red Sea shipping.

That crossed a red line.

Local or regional disruption is one thing. Interfering with global supply chains triggered the wrath of far more powerful actors.

Right now, Iran’s posture on these three issues is clear: The nuclear issue? They’re playing games. The missile program? They’re playing hardball. The proxy militias? They’re playing deaf.

But time is running out.

According to sources, the deadline being floated to Tehran is July 15 – by which time they must commit, in principle and in writing, to addressing all three issues within 90 days of structured talks.

What happens if they don’t? Hostilities will resume. Sanctions will increase. Isolation will deepen.

And this time, the regime’s internal fractures may not survive the pressure.

So where are we now? We are in a pause, not peace. The upcoming Oslo backchannel talks may set the tone. EU/GCC might act as the broker. But resolve must replace deflection.

Until then, forgive me for being a bit jaded. After all these years, every time there’s a “breakthrough,” I find myself thinking: “Ah yes, another war. Meh. Seen this movie before.”

Let’s see if this one has a different ending.

Disclaimer: Views expressed by writers in this section are their own and do not reflect Milli Chronicle’s point-of-view.