Before tensions sharply escalated again in recent hours, returning the region to another critical moment, US President Donald Trump had reaffirmed that Washington and Tehran were nearing the final stages of an agreement outlining broad principles for resolving outstanding disputes.
The proposed framework reportedly included strict American demands to impose major restrictions on Iran’s nuclear programme, alongside a gradual removal of restrictions imposed by both sides on maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.
Trump Suspends “Project Freedom”
In an effort to preserve diplomatic space, Trump suspended Operation Project Freedom on Tuesday, 5 May. The operation had aimed to break Iran’s effective control over the strategic waterway.
The project was halted only hours after senior US national security officials declared it a complete success, despite the fact that only a limited number of tankers had crossed the strait under American protection.
According to reports, objections from several Arab Gulf states played a role in Trump’s decision to pause the operation. These governments reportedly urged Washington to prioritise Pakistani mediation efforts rather than provoke direct confrontation with Tehran.
Despite the suspension of Project Freedom, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps continued asserting control over the strait by targeting American vessels and warships passing through the area. In response, the United States launched retaliatory strikes against IRGC fast attack boats and several ports along the Iranian coastline.
Iranian missiles and drones also struck multiple targets inside the United Arab Emirates.
Nuclear Negotiations Continue Amid Deep Divisions
Tehran and Washington continue attempting to finalise a one page memorandum of understanding intended to serve as a framework agreement.
American officials had reportedly demanded formal Iranian acceptance of the agreement by Friday, 8 May 2026. However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry stated that the government was still reviewing the American proposals delivered through Islamabad and would respond soon.
Meanwhile, Iran’s semi official Tasnim News Agency, which is closely linked to the IRGC, reported that the American memorandum contains conditions Tehran considers unacceptable. The position reflects the Revolutionary Guard’s view that Iran currently holds strategic leverage in the confrontation and should insist on its own settlement terms.
While both sides exchange positions behind closed doors, international media coverage has largely focused on the sharp rise in global oil and natural gas prices and the broader economic consequences of the conflict.
Proposed Uranium Restrictions
Trump recently stated that a diplomatic agreement was close, telling reporters last week that Iranian negotiators had become more “flexible”.
A draft text published by Axios and other media platforms suggested that Iran could agree to a long term suspension of uranium enrichment, potentially lasting up to fifteen years.
Following the suspension period, Iranian enrichment activities would reportedly be restricted to 3.67 per cent purity, a level considered suitable for civilian nuclear reactors but far below the 90 per cent purity associated with weapons grade uranium.
Tehran had previously pledged that it would never halt uranium enrichment under any circumstances.
Iran may also agree to remove its buried stockpile of 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60 per cent purity from its territory. According to estimates, that amount could theoretically fuel eleven nuclear weapons if enriched further to weapons grade levels.
The material would reportedly either be diluted or reprocessed to neutralise its military potential.
Russia, which has long been involved in Iran’s civilian nuclear programme, is considered the most likely destination for the stockpile.
Trump reportedly refuses to allow Tehran to retain the material, which is believed to remain beneath the ruins of the Isfahan uranium conversion facility destroyed during last year’s Operation Midnight Hammer bombing campaign.
Sanctions Relief and Strait Access
In exchange, reports surrounding the American Iranian understandings suggest Tehran would receive major relief from US sanctions.
Both sides would also gradually ease restrictions on navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, including the American blockade targeting Iranian ports.
Trump’s sudden return to diplomacy temporarily halted what international officials described as an imminent return to a large scale regional war only one month after the ceasefire.
On Monday, 4 May, Project Freedom appeared likely to shatter the fragile truce entirely, despite American officials portraying the operation as a defensive humanitarian mission intended to assist trapped vessels and crews leaving the Gulf.
The project represented Trump’s response to mounting political pressure caused by soaring global energy prices and demands to end the conflict without abandoning key strategic objectives.
Military Build Up in the Gulf
In mid April, Trump attempted to counter Iran’s closure of the strait without openly violating the ceasefire by imposing a naval blockade on Iranian ports.
Although US Central Command framed Project Freedom as an effort to improve international coordination and maritime security cooperation, it confirmed direct American military involvement.
The operation included guided missile destroyers, more than 100 air and naval aircraft, unmanned multi domain systems, and approximately 15,000 troops.
On 4 May, the only full operational day of Project Freedom, American warships assisted several US flagged commercial vessels in crossing the strait. However, the estimated 1,500 ships stranded inside the Gulf did not immediately attempt to leave.
If the operation resumes, its success will largely depend on whether it can restore confidence within global energy markets. Shipping companies and insurers would need to determine that the risks of transit through the strait had significantly decreased.
Should Project Freedom fail to restore acceptable traffic flow, Trump may escalate towards a more organised naval escort mission, a move that also carries the risk of direct Iranian retaliation.
IRGC Escalation and UAE Strikes
IRGC commanders, who appear to dominate wartime decision making inside Iran, rapidly moved to undermine Project Freedom through additional attacks on commercial shipping and American naval assets.
The Revolutionary Guard, alongside other hardline Iranian factions, remains determined not to surrender Iran’s strategic grip over the strait to American forces, viewing such an outcome as a major geopolitical defeat that would weaken Tehran’s leverage.
At the same time, the IRGC faces operational limitations that have reduced its ability to effectively confront American military power.
All missiles and drones launched by the IRGC against American warships were reportedly intercepted by ship based defence systems. The attacks also prompted Washington to expand its rules of engagement, authorising pre emptive and retaliatory strikes against IRGC fast attack boats.
The United States subsequently struck and disrupted operations at several Iranian ports along the Strait of Hormuz coastline on Thursday, 7 May, including Bandar Abbas, Qeshm Island, and Sirik.
In what appeared to be an effort to weaken Gulf Arab support for Washington, Iran directed its heaviest attacks towards the UAE.
On 4 May, Tehran launched fifteen ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and drones against Emirati targets.
The Emirati Ministry of Defence later announced that Iran carried out additional attacks on Tuesday. Most projectiles were intercepted, though a tanker belonging to the state owned Abu Dhabi National Oil Company suffered damage, while a drone strike ignited a fire at an oil facility in Fujairah.
Internal Divisions Inside Tehran
The attacks on the UAE reportedly triggered debate within Tehran itself, with elected civilian leaders questioning the IRGC’s decision to target a Gulf state that Iran hopes to rebuild relations with after the conflict ends.
If negotiations with Washington continue progressing, it may indicate that Iran’s civilian leadership is beginning to challenge the Revolutionary Guard’s willingness to prolong confrontation with the United States regardless of the economic and political costs imposed on the Iranian population.
However, if diplomacy collapses once again, the threat of a renewed regional explosion will quickly return.
