Can Trump’s push for a deal with Iran turn a tactical pause into lasting peace?

From Washington's perspective, the recent actions signal a strategic recalibration in the ongoing confrontation with Iran. While President Trump has asserted the likelihood of a peace deal, this claim is met with skepticism given the persistent disputes over nuclear capabilities, sanctions, and maritime security. The decision to pause a naval operation, intended to escort commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz, has ignited a debate about the administration's true intentions. Is this a genuine move towards a negotiated settlement, or merely a tactical pause before further escalation?

“

Once the war ends, it will not start again. Likely the administration is claiming these maximal gains as political cover to end the war without achieving any of the objectives that it was after when the war started.

Analysts, including prominent voices like Vali Nasr, an Iranian-American scholar, observe a familiar cycle in U.S.-Iran relations: a period of heightened tension followed by a partial de-escalation, often without a clearly defined end goal. Nasr suggests that the administration might be seeking to de-escalate the conflict without achieving its initial maximalist objectives. He points out that the crisis has inadvertently created new strategic problems, such as the potential closure of the Strait of Hormuz, which now requires resolution.

“

Now its goal is to end the war and solve a problem that did not exist before the war: the closure of the Strait of Hormuz.

The history of diplomacy between the U.S. and Iran is fraught with cycles of apparent breakthroughs that ultimately fail to materialize. Trump's previous claims of being close to a deal, followed by the unveiling of a wish list that Iran did not meet, illustrate this pattern. This history leads many to view the latest assertions of a possible deal with caution.

“

We have been here before. He [Trump] claimed we are very close to a deal. He put his wish list on the table, and ended it when the Iranians did not respond as he expected.

From a strategic standpoint, Iran is likely to approach any negotiations cautiously. Their probable response would be to seek an immediate de-escalation, with the lifting of blockades in exchange for reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Only after a sustained period of de-escalation would they consider engaging on the nuclear issue, ensuring that Washington can deliver on its initial promises before making any irreversible commitments.

“

The Iranians are going to give the same response they gave before, which is we can end the war now. You lift your blockade. We open the Strait of Hormuz. We will see if this works for a month. During that time, we can start talking about everything else.