Iran is reviewing a U.S. response to Tehran’s proposed seven-day cease-fire and reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, with Qatari mediators continuing indirect negotiations as the two sides remain divided over sanctions, nuclear commitments and which government must act first.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Iran is considering a U.S. counterproposal aimed at reviving negotiations to end the seven-month war and restore normal shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, signaling that indirect diplomacy remains active despite President Donald Trump’s public rejection of Tehran’s initial offer.
Iranian officials said Wednesday that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi received Washington’s response through Qatari mediators and would return to Tehran to present the proposal to senior Iranian officials for consideration.
The substance of the American response has not been made public, leaving unresolved precisely what Washington is offering or demanding.
A non-Iranian official briefed on the negotiations told Reuters that Washington and Tehran largely agree on the steps necessary to move toward a settlement but remain divided over the sequence in which those commitments would occur.
That sequencing dispute has emerged as one of the largest remaining obstacles to an agreement.
Iran wants the United States to begin lifting economic and military pressure before Tehran reopens the Strait of Hormuz and moves into broader nuclear negotiations. Washington has insisted that Iran first make concrete progress on its nuclear program before receiving significant sanctions relief or access to frozen assets.
The U.S. response reportedly outlines a seven-day period of confidence-building measures that could move the two governments back toward an expanded version of the memorandum of understanding reached in June, including specific steps involving Iran’s nuclear program.
The official who described the proposal to Reuters did not disclose those nuclear measures or provide a complete account of the U.S. terms.
The diplomatic exchange comes only days after Trump publicly dismissed Iran’s seven-day proposal.
“They want to make a deal, but it is not the deal that I want to make,” Trump told Axios after rejecting Tehran’s offer.
Trump said Iran had “overplayed their hand” and argued its government was negotiating because “they are losing so badly.”
Despite that public rejection, Trump also said he expected negotiations to continue, and American and Iranian officials have kept exchanging messages through intermediaries.
Qatar has taken the leading role in the current shuttle diplomacy, transmitting proposals and responses between the two governments rather than bringing American and Iranian officials into direct negotiations.
Trump maintained his confrontational public posture Tuesday when reporters asked whether he believed Tehran was prepared to concede.
“I don’t know if they’re going to give up yet, but they’ll give up,” Trump said. “But they’re doing very poorly.”
The president also reiterated that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon remains a central U.S. objective.
The continuing negotiations therefore present two parallel tracks: public statements from Trump emphasizing military and economic pressure, and private diplomatic exchanges testing whether Washington and Tehran can agree on a sequence for ending the conflict.
Iran’s original proposal centered on a seven-day timetable.
Under Tehran’s plan, the United States would first satisfy conditions connected with the memorandum reached between Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian in June.
Araghchi said that once those steps were implemented, Iran would reopen the Strait of Hormuz and restore normal maritime traffic at the end of seven days.
Iran has also sought an end to the U.S. naval blockade of Iranian ports, relief from economic sanctions and access to frozen Iranian funds.
An analysis by Al Jazeera described the Iranian proposal as broadly moving through several stages: cessation of fighting, removal of the American naval blockade and oil sanctions, release of frozen Iranian assets, reopening of Hormuz after seven days and subsequent negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.
The plan draws heavily from the June memorandum but would compress its timetable and alter the order in which Washington and Tehran fulfill their obligations.
The United States has objected to that order.
An American official told CBS News that Washington could consider sanctions relief and the release of frozen Iranian funds if Iran demonstrates concrete progress on its nuclear program.
The official said there would be no final agreement unless nuclear issues are addressed.
American and Iranian negotiators consequently appear to be arguing less over whether sanctions, frozen assets, Hormuz and the nuclear program are part of an eventual arrangement than over which government takes the first irreversible step.
Iran wants economic and military concessions early in the process.
Washington wants nuclear concessions tied to — or preceding — those benefits.
Trump has meanwhile disputed reports portraying him as having already offered economic relief.
“I offered them NOTHING!” Trump wrote on Truth Social Monday after Axios reported that he was open to easing sanctions and allowing Iran access to frozen funds in return for nuclear progress.
That public statement did not necessarily contradict the account from the U.S. official cited by CBS, which described possible sanctions relief as conditional on future Iranian actions rather than as a concession already granted.
Qatar has continued trying to bridge those differences.
The negotiations intensified around last week’s United Nations General Assembly meetings in New York, where intermediaries relayed messages between Araghchi and American representatives.
Iran continued seeking a formal American response even after Trump had publicly rejected the Iranian plan.
“Our plan, which became known as the seven-point plan, was conveyed to the Americans through the Qatari intermediary,” Araghchi said earlier this week, according to CBS News.
He said Tehran was waiting for Washington’s official answer through the same channel.
That answer has now reached the Iranian foreign minister.
The next decision rests with Tehran.
The talks are rooted in the June memorandum negotiated earlier in the war between the Trump and Pezeshkian governments.
That arrangement extended a temporary cease-fire and laid out a broader framework addressing nuclear issues, sanctions and regional security, but it ultimately collapsed and fighting resumed.
Negotiators are now attempting to revive portions of the earlier framework while adapting it to conditions that have changed significantly during additional months of war.
Among the most consequential changes is the condition of the Strait of Hormuz.
The narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf with the Gulf of Oman previously carried roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supplies, making it one of the most important shipping routes in the global economy.
Maritime traffic has increased in recent weeks but remains substantially disrupted.
Shipowners and insurers continue to demand significant premiums to accept the risks involved in navigating the area, while the conflict has repeatedly threatened commercial vessels.
Two ships were reportedly struck by projectiles during recent incidents.
Iran has made normalization of Hormuz traffic a central bargaining chip in its negotiations with Washington.
The United States, meanwhile, has imposed a naval blockade against Iranian ports as part of its effort to constrain Tehran’s oil exports and increase economic pressure on the government.
Those measures have affected energy markets far beyond Iran.
Brent crude climbed above $101 per barrel earlier this week before easing when reports emerged that Qatari mediators were continuing work toward an agreement, according to CBS News.
U.S. gasoline prices have also risen sharply during the conflict.
The national average for regular gasoline reached nearly $4.48 per gallon, compared with approximately $3.13 a year earlier, according to AAA figures cited by CBS.
Those energy costs have increased pressure for a resolution even as neither side publicly signals a willingness to surrender its principal negotiating demands.
Trump has consistently argued that military and economic pressure is weakening Iran and improving Washington’s bargaining position.
Iranian leaders have rejected demands that they surrender and maintain that the country can continue fighting if negotiations fail.
Araghchi said Sunday that Iran remained prepared for either diplomacy or renewed fighting.
“At the same time, we stand ready for diplomacy. It is up to President Trump to choose,” he said during an interview on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”
The diplomatic activity this week suggests both governments continue to see potential value in negotiations despite their public rhetoric.
Washington has not accepted Tehran’s original seven-day plan.
Tehran has not accepted Washington’s conditions.
But neither government has ended the indirect talks.
Instead, Qatar is attempting to narrow the remaining gaps by negotiating over the order of commitments — including when fighting stops, when the blockade is lifted, when sanctions are eased, when Iranian assets can be released, when Hormuz fully reopens and when Iran takes additional steps on its nuclear program.
The eventual sequence is particularly important because both sides distrust the other’s willingness to fulfill later promises once an initial concession has been made.
For Iran, reopening the Strait before receiving substantial U.S. concessions could surrender one of Tehran’s strongest sources of leverage.
For Washington, providing sanctions relief or releasing frozen funds before obtaining measurable nuclear commitments could reduce American leverage without guaranteeing subsequent Iranian compliance.
The reported U.S. counterproposal attempts to bridge that divide through a seven-day confidence-building period rather than immediately implementing every element of a permanent settlement.
Whether Iran considers that structure sufficient remains unknown.
Araghchi is expected to consult officials in Tehran before delivering a response through the mediators.
Until then, the war continues, the Strait remains disrupted and American economic pressure on Iran remains in place.
The arrival of Washington’s formal response nevertheless marks the clearest indication that the negotiating channel remains functional after Trump publicly rejected Iran’s initial plan.
The dispute has now moved from whether negotiations will continue to the much more difficult question of whether Washington and Tehran can agree not only on what each side must ultimately do, but who must move first.
Original article
Comments