After Iran talks falter, will Trump escalate or negotiate?
After Iran Talks Falters, Trump’s Next Move Uncertain
The 21-hour negotiation in Islamabad failed to resolve 47 years of antagonism between Iran and the United States. Despite the pause in weeks of intense conflict, the high-level talks were expected to struggle, given the deep divisions over critical issues. The most pressing concerns included Iran’s nuclear program and its control of the Strait of Hormuz, a vital waterway whose disruption has sparked global economic unrest.
Breaking the deadlock required more than just technical discussions; it demanded overcoming a profound mistrust. Just a day prior, it was unclear if the two sides would even meet, let alone engage in direct talks. This meeting marked the end of a political taboo. Now, the focus shifts to what follows: Will the US opt for further escalation or return to the negotiating table?
Key to this moment is the two-week ceasefire that temporarily averted the threat of US President Donald Trump’s plan to “destroy a whole civilisation” in Iran. Reports indicate that some discussions persisted after US Vice President JD Vance left, declaring the delegation had presented its “final and best offer.” Yet, the outcome remains ambiguous, with the US and Iran still at odds over the terms.
Behind the Scenes: A Tense Negotiation
Details from the five-star hotel in Islamabad remain sparse. The talks, supported by Pakistani mediators, involved extensive communication between experts, advisers, and, according to Vance, “dozens” of calls to Trump himself. “We need to see an affirmative commitment that Iran will not seek a nuclear weapon,” Vance emphasized during a dawn press briefing, highlighting the core goal of the US delegation.
“We’ve had a number of substantive negotiations,” Vance said, while acknowledging the talks had not achieved an agreement. “This is bad news for Iran much more than the United States of America.”
In February, Iran had proposed new concessions, including reducing its uranium stockpile to 440kg enriched at 60%—a level nearing weapons-grade. However, Iran has steadfastly maintained its “right” to enrich uranium and has not yet relinquished the stockpile, now reportedly hidden in the rubble following US and Israeli strikes. The country also refuses to permit the Strait of Hormuz to remain open without a binding agreement.
Confidence and Contingency
Both delegations arrived in Islamabad with a sense of confidence, believing their positions were advantageous. They understood that if talks failed, the option to resume hostilities remained open, despite the escalating costs for civilians and the global economy. Dr. Sanam Vakil of Chatham House noted a “limited psychological understanding of the adversary and what compromises are needed for a real deal” as a key challenge.
Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Esmail Baghaei, criticized the US for “excessive demands and unlawful requests” in a post on X. Parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, who led Iran’s team, stated that “the opposing side ultimately failed to gain the trust of the Iranian delegation in this round.” Nonetheless, Iran has signaled openness to further dialogue, with Pakistan’s Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar urging all parties to maintain the fragile ceasefire.
Historical Context and Future Outlook
The 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and world powers took 18 months of negotiation, marked by both progress and setbacks. Trump, however, has shown a preference for quicker resolutions, warning that Tehran would not “play us” if it attempted to prolong talks. Pakistani journalist Kamran Yousef described the current round as a “no breakthrough but no breakdown” scenario, reflecting the precarious state of the ongoing negotiations.
