By Gloria Ogbonna
Tensions between the United States and Iran escalated sharply over the weekend after a senior Iranian military commander warned that a “renewed conflict” with Washington is “likely,” following strong remarks from President Donald Trump rejecting Tehran’s latest proposal and reaffirming that military options remain under consideration.
Speaking to reporters before departing West Palm Beach, Florida, President Trump expressed skepticism about Iran’s newly submitted framework, saying he had only been briefed on the “concept of the deal” and was awaiting the final language.
“They’re going to give me the exact wording now… I’ll let you know about it later,” he said.
Moments afterward, in a post on Truth Social, the president sharpened his tone, writing that he “can’t imagine” the proposal would be acceptable because Iran has “not yet paid a big enough price for what they have done to Humanity, and the World, over the last 47 years.”
The president’s reference to “47 years” alludes to the period since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, during which the Islamic Republic has been repeatedly accused by U.S. officials of sponsoring terrorism, funding proxy militias across the Middle East, and targeting American troops and interests. Successive administrations have cited Iran’s support for groups such as Hezbollah and other armed networks as central to regional instability.
The latest flare-up follows President Trump’s outright rejection on Friday of the same proposal, reportedly conveyed through Pakistani intermediaries. He made clear he is “not satisfied” with the conditions Tehran is demanding and warned there “may never be a deal” if the regime continues insisting on terms the United States “can’t agree to.”
At the White House, President Trump also described deep internal divisions within Iran’s leadership, suggesting those fractures are complicating negotiations.
“There’s tremendous discord… the leadership is very disjointed — two, three, maybe four groups… they all want to make a deal, but they’re all messed up,” he said, portraying a government struggling to maintain coherence after sustained military and economic pressure.
The president confirmed he has been briefed by U.S. Central Command on potential strike scenarios and is weighing both diplomatic and military paths forward.
“Do we want to go and just blast the hell out of them and finish them forever — or do we want to try to make a deal?” he said, adding that he would prefer to avoid escalation “on a human basis,” but emphasizing that military action remains a viable option if Iran “misbehaves.”
Asked again Saturday whether strikes could resume, President Trump declined to specify triggers but reiterated that the possibility remains “certainly” on the table.
Iran’s response was swift and defiant. Mohammad Jafar Asadi, a senior commander within Iran’s military establishment, said Saturday that “a renewed conflict between Iran and the United States is likely,” arguing that “evidence has shown that the United States is not committed to any promises or agreements.” He added that Iran’s armed forces are “fully prepared for any new adventures or foolishness from the Americans.”
Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, echoed the message during remarks to foreign diplomats in Tehran, insisting that “the ball is in the United States’ court” and claiming Iran is “prepared for both paths” — diplomacy or confrontation.
At the center of the dispute is a reported 14-point Iranian proposal that U.S. officials and analysts describe as sweeping and largely incompatible with Washington’s red lines. According to Iranian state-linked outlets, the framework demands U.S. security guarantees, the withdrawal of American forces from parts of the region, an end to the naval blockade, sanctions relief, release of frozen Iranian assets, compensation payments, and a cessation of fighting “on all fronts,” including Lebanon.
The proposal also calls for a new mechanism governing the Strait of Hormuz — a strategic waterway through which a significant share of the world’s oil supply passes. Such a mechanism, critics argue, could effectively grant Tehran expanded leverage over one of the globe’s most critical energy chokepoints.
Notably, the plan reportedly compresses negotiations into a 30-day timeline and defers meaningful discussion of Iran’s nuclear program — an approach Washington views as a nonstarter.
President Trump has repeatedly stated that no agreement will move forward unless Iran commits unequivocally to never obtaining a nuclear weapon. “There will be no deal” without direct resolution of the nuclear issue, he has warned.
Tehran, however, continues to prioritize immediate economic relief while pushing nuclear negotiations into a later phase — a sequencing U.S. officials believe is designed to secure upfront concessions without resolving the core dispute.
Meanwhile, the U.S. military posture in the region remains robust. Two days after briefing President Trump on strike options, U.S. Central Command chief Adm. Brad Cooper traveled to the region and met with forces aboard the USS Tripoli in the Arabian Sea, near the Strait of Hormuz, where U.S. naval enforcement actions continue.
The naval blockade has emerged as a central pressure point. U.S. enforcement measures have reportedly turned away dozens of vessels, significantly disrupting Iran’s oil exports. Pentagon estimates suggest the regime has lost billions in revenue, with more than 30 tankers stranded and tens of millions of barrels of oil unable to reach market.
Iranian officials, for their part, are signaling they intend to assert their influence over the Strait. Ali Nikzad, deputy speaker of Iran’s parliament, warned that Tehran would not “relinquish our rights in the Strait of Hormuz” and suggested shipping “will not be the same as before.”
Another senior lawmaker, Mohammadreza Rezaei, underscored Tehran’s priorities by declaring, “Managing the Strait of Hormuz is more important than acquiring nuclear weapons,” highlighting how central control of the waterway has become to Iran’s strategic calculations.
As diplomatic channels remain open but strained, both sides appear entrenched. Washington continues applying maximum economic and military pressure while demanding firm nuclear commitments. Tehran insists on sweeping concessions and signals readiness for confrontation.
With U.S. forces positioned across the region and Iranian leaders openly warning of potential conflict, the prospect of renewed hostilities is no longer theoretical. Whether negotiations can bridge the widening gap remains uncertain — but the stakes for regional stability and global energy markets are rising by the day.
Source Breitbart
Original article
Comments