The United States has presented Iran with a sweeping 15-point ceasefire framework, delivered through Pakistan, that demands the dismantling of Tehran’s nuclear programme, limits on its missile arsenal and an end to support for regional proxy forces — in exchange for the removal of all sanctions and a commitment to support civilian nuclear energy generation.
President Donald Trump described the diplomatic exchanges as ‘very good and productive conversations,’ but Iranian officials flatly rejected that characterisation, calling it fake news. The contradiction underscores the fragile and contested nature of what diplomats from Egypt, Turkey and Pakistan have quietly assembled: an indirect communication channel linking American and Iranian officials that has taken shape over the past several days.
Pakistan has formally offered to host peace talks in Islamabad, and the three mediating nations are pressing for a face-to-face meeting between US and Iranian representatives by Thursday. An unnamed Iranian source acknowledged there had been ‘outreach’ rather than full negotiations, and said Tehran was prepared to listen to ‘sustainable’ proposals — and was willing to provide guarantees that it would never develop nuclear weapons.
The war began on February 28, when the United States and Israel launched coordinated military strikes against Iran. Iranian state media confirmed that day that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had been killed at his office in Tehran. Within a week, Mojtaba Khamenei, the late leader’s second son, was selected as Iran’s new supreme leader — a choice Trump publicly criticised, telling NBC News he believed Iran had made a mistake in the appointment.
The human cost of the conflict has been severe. Iran’s health ministry reports 1,500 people killed and 18,551 injured as of Tuesday. The Pentagon claims it has destroyed 90 percent of Iran’s missile capacity. The US is also expected to deploy as many as 3,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division to the region, a move that signals Washington is preparing for a prolonged engagement even as it pursues a diplomatic off-ramp.
The economic shockwaves have been immediate and global. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) closed the Strait of Hormuz to shipping after the strikes began, sending oil prices above $100 a barrel — compared with a pre-war Brent crude price of roughly $65. The IRGC has since permitted a limited number of vessels, primarily those flying Indian, Pakistani and Chinese flags, to transit the waterway.
The US ceasefire proposal calls for a one-month pause in hostilities while both sides negotiate a permanent settlement. Among its core demands: the dismantling of nuclear facilities at Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow — the same sites struck during a 12-day war between Iran and Israel in June 2025 — a permanent Iranian commitment to forgo nuclear weapons, and the handover of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In return, Washington has offered full sanctions relief and support for electricity generation at Iran’s Bushehr civil nuclear plant, the country’s only commercial reactor, located approximately 750 kilometres south of Tehran and operated with Russian-produced uranium.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian laid out Tehran’s own conditions on March 11, demanding recognition of Iran’s legitimate rights, payment of war reparations, and firm international guarantees against future aggression. Iran also seeks the closure of all US military bases in the region and a new legal mechanism that would formalise its de facto control over transit through the Strait of Hormuz.
On Wednesday, Ebrahim Zolfaqari, the top spokesperson for Iran’s joint military command, appeared on Iranian state television to mock Trump’s claims of productive diplomacy, reflecting the defiant public posture Tehran has maintained throughout the conflict.
Analysts note the war has exposed internal fault lines within Iran’s power structure. Zeidon Alkinani of Qatar’s Georgetown University observed that the conflict has brought into sharper relief the differences between the IRGC and Iran’s political leadership — a tension that could complicate any eventual settlement.
The diplomatic backdrop is shaped by decades of mutual hostility. The US first imposed sanctions on Iran following the 1979 Tehran embassy hostage crisis, the year an Islamic revolution overthrew the US-backed shah and transformed the country into an Islamic republic. Trump himself withdrew the United States from the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), under which Iran had committed to limiting uranium enrichment to civilian levels, three years after the agreement was signed.
Iranian-American economist Nader Habibi puts the probability of substantive talks materialising at 60 percent. Domestic political pressure in Washington may be a factor: opinion polls consistently show that most Americans do not support the war, and US midterm elections are scheduled for November. Whether that pressure translates into a diplomatic breakthrough — or whether the gulf between Washington’s demands and Tehran’s terms proves unbridgeable — remains the defining question of the coming days.
