Former US President Donald Trump has expressed dissatisfaction with Iran’s latest proposal aimed at ending the ongoing conflict, signalling a deepening deadlock between the two sides. The disagreement, particularly over the sequencing of nuclear negotiations, has dimmed hopes for a swift resolution to the war that has already disrupted global energy markets and heightened geopolitical tensions.
According to a senior US official, Trump has rejected Iran’s recent peace proposal primarily because it delays discussions around Tehran’s nuclear programme. The Iranian plan reportedly suggests that both nations first focus on ending hostilities and resolving maritime tensions before addressing nuclear concerns.
However, Washington’s stance remains firm: nuclear issues must be addressed at the very beginning of any negotiations. Trump’s opposition underscores the United States’ long-standing concern over Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which it views as a critical security threat.
The White House has avoided detailed public commentary on the proposal. Spokeswoman Olivia Wales reiterated that the US “will not negotiate through the press,” while emphasising that America’s red lines remain unchanged.
The current standoff is deeply rooted in the collapse of the Iran Nuclear Deal, a landmark agreement between Iran and world powers. The deal had imposed strict limits on Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.
During his presidency, Trump withdrew the United States from the agreement, arguing it was flawed and failed to curb Iran’s broader regional influence. Since then, tensions have steadily escalated, eventually culminating in the present conflict.
Iran continues to maintain that its nuclear programme is intended solely for civilian purposes, while the US and its allies remain sceptical.
Diplomatic efforts to end the war have recently suffered setbacks. Trump cancelled a planned visit to Islamabad by key envoys, including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, signalling a slowdown in backchannel negotiations.
Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi has been actively engaging with regional and global powers. His diplomatic tour included visits to Islamabad, Oman, and Russia, where he held talks with President Vladimir Putin.
Russia has reportedly expressed support for Iran’s position, reinforcing Tehran’s confidence in pursuing a phased negotiation strategy.
Araqchi has also claimed that Washington’s willingness to negotiate reflects its failure to achieve key objectives in the war.
Iran’s plan outlines a multi-stage approach to ending the conflict:
This sequencing, however, is fundamentally at odds with US expectations, creating a significant barrier to progress.
The ongoing conflict has had a profound impact on global energy markets. Oil prices have surged as supply routes become increasingly constrained.
The Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of the world’s oil supply passes, has seen a dramatic reduction in traffic. Before the conflict, approximately 125 to 140 ships transited the strait daily. That number has now plummeted, with only a handful of vessels recorded in recent days.
At least six tankers carrying Iranian oil have reportedly been turned back due to a US naval blockade. Analysts warn that continued disruption could further tighten global supply and exacerbate inflationary pressures.
Energy market expert Fawad Razaqzada noted that traders are now focused less on political rhetoric and more on the actual movement of crude oil, which remains severely restricted.
Iran has strongly criticised the US naval blockade, describing it as “legalised piracy.” Tehran argues that such actions violate international law and further complicate efforts to restore stability in the region.
The blockade has become a major flashpoint, intensifying tensions and reducing trust between the two sides at a time when diplomatic engagement is already fragile.
Back in the United States, Trump is facing growing domestic criticism over the prolonged conflict. Public approval ratings have reportedly declined, with many questioning the shifting justifications for the war.
Critics argue that the administration’s strategy lacks clarity, while supporters maintain that a firm stance is necessary to counter Iran’s ambitions.
The political pressure adds another layer of complexity to the situation, potentially influencing Washington’s negotiating posture.
At the heart of the impasse lies a fundamental disagreement over the order of negotiations:
This divergence has created a diplomatic deadlock, with neither side willing to compromise on what they see as a critical priority.
Conclusion: Uncertain Path Ahead
Despite ongoing diplomatic activity, prospects for a breakthrough remain uncertain. The gap between Washington and Tehran continues to widen, particularly on the issue of sequencing negotiations.
As the conflict drags on, its impact is being felt far beyond the region — from rising oil prices to increasing geopolitical instability. Without a shift in positions from either side, the chances of a near-term resolution appear slim.