No deal announced after Trump meeting to make ‘final determination’ on Iran
No deal announced after Trump meeting to make ‘final determination’ on Iran
No deal announced after Trump meeting – On Friday, US President Donald Trump gathered with key aides in the White House Situation Room to finalize plans for extending the ceasefire with Iran. Despite the meeting, no agreement was reached, leaving the path forward unclear. The Situation Room, a central location for handling major crises, was used to deliberate on the next steps, but the session concluded without definitive conclusions. This development comes amid ongoing tensions between the two nations, with both sides accusing each other of breaching the truce in recent days.
During the session, Trump outlined specific conditions for the ceasefire extension, emphasizing that Iran must commit to a nuclear-free future. He called for the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz to ensure “unrestricted shipping traffic in both directions” and demanded the destruction of any mines in the waterway. These points were highlighted as central to the framework, though the meeting failed to produce a concrete resolution. US officials noted that the framework, tentatively agreed upon earlier in the week, required final approval from both Trump and Iranian leadership to take effect.
“President Trump will only make a deal that is good for America and satisfies his red lines. Iran can never possess a nuclear weapon,” said a White House official speaking to CBS News, the BBC’s US news partner.
Trump’s comments on Friday also included a social media post indicating his willingness to lift the US naval blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. He stated that ships currently trapped in the waterway would “start the process of heading home,” a move he framed as a concession to Iran. However, he stressed that Iran must also allow the US to remove and destroy its enriched uranium stockpiles. “No money will be exchanged until further notice,” he added, suggesting that other agreements, though significant, were secondary to his core demands.
The meeting’s outcome was met with mixed reactions. While the White House confirmed the session had concluded without further details, Iran’s state media agency, Fars, reported that the latest statements from Trump were a “mixture of truth and lies.” According to Fars, the memorandum of understanding agreed on Thursday did not include provisions for destroying nuclear materials, a point Iran emphasized as crucial. This discrepancy has raised questions about the agreement’s enforceability and whether it truly addresses Iran’s nuclear ambitions.
Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Esmaeil Baqaei, reiterated the country’s position during a state television address. He stated that Iran remains “focused on ending the war” and that negotiations on its nuclear program are not part of the current discussions. “There are no negotiations on the nuclear issue,” he said, underscoring the country’s stance that its program is entirely peaceful. This aligns with Iran’s broader argument that its nuclear activities are for civilian use and not aimed at developing weapons.
The US has long pressed Iran to halt the production of highly enriched uranium, a key component for nuclear weapons. Officials argue that Iran’s current stockpiles could be weaponized, while Tehran maintains that its program is defensive and compliant with international agreements. The recent ceasefire, which began on 8 April, has been a flashpoint in this dispute. Trump has repeatedly claimed the US and Iran are “close to a deal,” but so far, the negotiations have yielded only provisional agreements without lasting impact.
Adding to the complexity, US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth suggested the possibility of resuming strikes against Iran. At a security summit in Singapore, he mentioned that the US has “more than suited” its stockpiles of munitions for such action, both in Iran and globally. This remark hints at the military readiness of the US, which could serve as leverage in ongoing talks. The recent attacks by the US and Israel on February 28, and Iran’s retaliatory strikes, have kept the region in a state of heightened alert, with the Strait of Hormuz effectively closed during the conflict.
The closure of the strait has had significant economic repercussions. Normally, around 20% of the world’s energy supplies pass through the waterway, and its disruption has led to a surge in global oil prices. This strategic location, vital for international trade, has become a symbol of the broader conflict between the two powers. Trump’s proposal to lift the blockade is seen as a potential step toward stabilizing the region, but Iran has been skeptical of such gestures.
US Vice-President JD Vance provided a glimpse into the negotiation process on Thursday, stating that talks were “going back and forth on a couple of language points,” particularly regarding the “question of enrichment.” While he acknowledged the discussions were “very close,” he emphasized that a final agreement had not yet been reached. “We’re not there yet, but we’re going to keep on working at it,” he said, highlighting the determination of US officials to secure terms favorable to their objectives.
Iran’s chief negotiator, Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, voiced similar skepticism in a social media post. He claimed that Iran would not commit to any agreement without seeing “action” from the US. “The winner of any agreement is the one who is better prepared for war the day after,” he wrote, suggesting that the talks are not just about diplomacy but also about military preparedness. This perspective reflects Iran’s cautious approach, given the history of US actions in the region.
Accusations of ceasefire violations have further strained relations. On Thursday, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) announced it had targeted a US air base in Kuwait, which it described as the origin of earlier strikes on Bandar Abbas, a strategic Iranian port near the Strait of Hormuz. The US Central Command labeled this attack as an “egregious ceasefire violation,” intensifying the diplomatic and military standoff. Such incidents underscore the fragility of the current truce and the challenges in maintaining it amidst competing interests.
As the situation continues to evolve, the stakes remain high. The White House’s meeting in the Situation Room was a critical moment, yet it left many questions unanswered. Whether the framework will hold or if new tensions will emerge depends on the willingness of both sides to compromise. For now, the US and Iran remain in a delicate balance, with the outcome of these talks shaping the future of their relationship and regional stability.