As the two week ceasefire announced by Donald Trump on 7 April approaches its expiration, uncertainty continues to dominate the trajectory of anticipated negotiations in Islamabad. The talks remain entangled in mutual conditions, rising maritime tensions, and unresolved core disputes surrounding the nuclear file.
This development coincides with a parallel negotiation track also announced by Trump, aimed at ending the Israeli war on Lebanon.
According to a Pakistani source involved in the discussions, the ceasefire between Washington and Tehran is set to expire at 8:00 pm Eastern Time on Wednesday, corresponding to 3:30 am Thursday in Tehran.
While Islamabad prepares to host the talks, conflicting reports have emerged regarding the US delegation. Trump stated that his team would depart “soon”, while other sources confirmed that JD Vance remains in the United States, denying reports of his imminent travel to Pakistan. However, CNN cited informed sources indicating that Vance is scheduled to leave Washington on Tuesday for Islamabad, stressing that the situation remains fluid.
Pakistani Mediation and “New Iranian Leverage”
Within mediation efforts, a Pakistani security source revealed that Asim Munir directly informed Trump that the ongoing naval blockade represents a major obstacle to negotiations. Trump reportedly responded that he would take this assessment into consideration.
Politically, the gap between both sides remains substantial. Iranian leadership has firmly rejected negotiations under pressure. President Masoud Pezeshkian stated that contradictory and non constructive signals from US officials reflect an attempt to force Iran into submission, emphasising that Iran will not yield to coercion.
Similarly, Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Trump seeks to transform negotiations into a platform for surrender, accusing Washington of escalating pressure through both blockade measures and ceasefire violations.
In a statement on X, Ghalibaf revealed that Tehran is prepared to unveil “new cards” if the war resumes, noting that Iran has spent the past two weeks preparing additional responses on the battlefield while rejecting negotiations under threat.
Impact of Trump’s Public Messaging
These Iranian positions align with reports from CNN citing officials within the Trump administration, who acknowledged that the president’s public remarks have negatively affected negotiations due to deep rooted Iranian mistrust toward the United States.
The network reported that Iranian officials expressed discomfort with Trump conducting negotiations through social media platforms and implying agreement on unresolved issues, with particular concern about appearing weak.
Despite the tensions, Reuters cited a senior Iranian official stating that Tehran is “positively considering” participation in the Pakistan talks. This reflects a noticeable shift in tone, attributed to Islamabad’s efforts to ease the US blockade.
Trump, meanwhile, expressed confidence in achieving a rapid nuclear agreement that would surpass the 2015 deal from which he withdrew in 2018. Writing on Truth Social, he asserted that he is under no pressure and that developments will unfold quickly.
Core Negotiation Obstacles
At the centre of the diplomatic dispute lies the nuclear file. Trump claimed that Iran had agreed to remove enriched uranium from its territory, a statement that Tehran denied on Monday.
Conversely, CNN reported that one of Iran’s latest proposals includes suspending uranium enrichment for ten years, followed by a second decade permitting limited enrichment at levels significantly below weapons grade.
On the ground, maritime tensions continue to escalate as a tangible obstacle. The United States Marine Corps boarded the Iranian cargo vessel “Tosca” after firing at its engine room to disable it, suspecting it was transporting dual use materials.
Tehran, which described the incident as “armed piracy”, stated through Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi that ongoing US violations of the ceasefire represent a primary barrier to sustaining diplomatic efforts.
Strait Tensions and Escalatory Rhetoric
These tensions have directly impacted global shipping routes. After briefly lifting its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran reinstated restrictions, reducing maritime traffic to near zero on Sunday, with only three vessels passing within a 12 hour period. This disruption triggered a roughly 5 percent surge in oil prices.
Amid continued US restrictions on Iranian ports, Trump warned that failure to meet US demands would result in widespread destruction, including strikes on infrastructure such as bridges and power stations.
In response, Tehran threatened to target electricity and desalination facilities in Gulf states if its civilian infrastructure is attacked.
Scenarios in the Final Hours
Assessing the potential outcomes, Middle East policy analyst Mahjoob Zweiri outlined three scenarios: reaching a permanent ceasefire followed by prolonged negotiations, extending the current truce due to failure to secure an agreement, or maintaining the status quo through limited confrontations without formal ceasefire renewal.
Zweiri considers an extension of the ceasefire alongside the formation of a negotiation framework the most likely outcome.
This aligns with the assessment of Hassan Ahmadian, who argues that continued de escalation remains the most probable path, noting that the forty day war failed to achieve Washington’s objectives and that further escalation would not alter the strategic balance.
Ahmadian expects either continued stagnation or a form of diplomatic exchange between the two sides, while ruling out a full scale escalation despite ongoing friction driven by the US blockade.
Lebanese Front: Fragile De escalation Efforts
On a parallel track, a fragile ten day ceasefire is in place in Lebanon, also announced by Trump, following Israeli incursions that coincided with the war involving Iran since late February.
In a notable move, Lebanese President Joseph Aoun appointed former ambassador Simon Karam to lead Lebanon’s delegation in direct negotiations with Israel hosted in Washington, stating that Lebanon does not seek self destruction.
A US State Department official confirmed that Washington will continue facilitating direct discussions conducted in good faith between both governments.
However, Hezbollah has rejected the path of direct negotiations and any disarmament efforts. MP Hassan Fadlallah stated that it is in Lebanon’s interest to withdraw from direct negotiations with Israel, asserting that no internal or external actor will be able to disarm Hezbollah.
