Trump said he believes the ceasefire is effectively over and questioned the value of continuing negotiations with Tehran. At the same time, he maintained that the latest military operations should not be viewed as the beginning of another prolonged conflict.

The mixed messaging comes only weeks after the United States and Iran reached an interim agreement designed to halt hostilities and create a pathway toward negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program and maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz.

Washington has accused Iran of continuing attacks against commercial shipping in the strategic waterway and of delaying progress toward a broader nuclear agreement. Tehran, meanwhile, contends that the United States has failed to uphold its own commitments under the temporary arrangement.

Regional Mediators Intensify Diplomatic Efforts

As military operations resumed, regional governments accelerated diplomatic efforts to prevent the ceasefire from collapsing altogether.

According to a regional intelligence official involved in mediation efforts, senior officials from Pakistan, Qatar and Egypt remain engaged in continuous discussions aimed at preserving the agreement. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and Saudi leaders are also participating in efforts to reduce tensions.

The official, who spoke anonymously because of the sensitivity of the negotiations, described the situation as increasingly fragile amid growing mistrust between Washington and Tehran.

One of the principal disputes centers on security in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global shipping route for oil and liquefied natural gas exports. U.S. officials accuse Iran of threatening freedom of navigation, while Iranian officials argue that Washington has violated understandings reached during negotiations and has failed to ensure implementation of a ceasefire involving Lebanon, including an Israeli military withdrawal.

Nuclear negotiations were expected to become the next phase of diplomacy following last month’s interim agreement, with both sides exploring a more durable settlement.

Military Pressure Raises Questions About Negotiations

Hours after warning that additional military action could occur, Trump confirmed that U.S. forces had launched fresh strikes intended to reduce Iran’s ability to threaten maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

“Anything that happens is going to happen very fast,” Trump said before the operation. “We’re not looking for a long time.”

He later suggested that the United States might no longer prioritize preserving the ceasefire.

“I think it’s over,” Trump said, adding that Washington could “just finish the job.”

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf rejected Trump’s position, accusing the United States of repeatedly violating the interim agreement.

“The era of bullying and extortion is over,” Qalibaf wrote on X. “It leads nowhere. We don’t fold.”

Pakistan, which helped broker the ceasefire, urged both governments to maintain dialogue.

In a statement, Pakistan’s Foreign Ministry said continued diplomacy remained the only viable path toward achieving lasting regional peace.

Analysts See Continued Bargaining Despite Escalation

Despite Trump’s increasingly confrontational rhetoric, some analysts believe both governments remain engaged in a broader negotiating strategy.

Michael Eisenstadt, director of the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, said public declarations about abandoning the memorandum of understanding may themselves be part of ongoing negotiations.

“We’re still in negotiating mode, no matter what the president says,” Eisenstadt said.

Ali Vaez, Iran director at the International Crisis Group, said Washington appears to be increasing military pressure while attempting to preserve diplomatic options.

However, he cautioned that such coercive tactics carry significant risks if military escalation begins to outpace political control.

Vaez also argued that Iran retains strong incentives to continue negotiations because it needs the economic relief envisioned under the interim agreement.

Political and Economic Risks Continue to Grow

Vice President JD Vance defended the renewed military action, saying Iran had complied with the agreement only briefly before resuming attacks on shipping.

“If they shoot at ships, we’re going to knock the hell out of them,” Vance said during an event in Milwaukee.

Trump has also revived threats against Iranian civilian infrastructure, including electric facilities, desalination plants and the country’s oil-production hub on Kharg Island, saying the United States could seize the island if necessary.

Meanwhile, continued instability has renewed concerns about global energy markets.

Trump acknowledged that military operations can push oil prices higher but argued the consequences are justified if they prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.

The economic implications may also carry domestic political consequences.

With U.S. midterm elections less than four months away, sustained increases in fuel prices could create additional political pressure for Republicans seeking to maintain control of Congress, even as the administration argues that its strategy is necessary to address long-term security concerns.

Whether the renewed military campaign represents a negotiating tactic or the beginning of a broader escalation remains uncertain, as regional mediators continue working to prevent the temporary ceasefire from unraveling completely.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

Article Topics: Iran Conflict | Donald Trump | Strait of Hormuz | Ceasefire | Nuclear Talks | U.S. Military | Middle East | Oil Prices

The post Trump’s New Iran Strikes Cloud Ceasefire Future as Diplomats Race to Prevent Wider Conflict appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Mass funeral processions in Tehran and other cities drew large crowds of supporters who praised Khamenei as a defender of the Islamic Republic and an opponent of the United States and Israel. At the same time, many Iranians reflected on years of political repression, economic hardship and growing polarization that critics say intensified during his leadership.

Interviews conducted by The Associated Press with Iranians from different backgrounds highlighted starkly different views of Khamenei’s rule, underscoring the divisions that continue to shape the country’s political landscape as its leadership transitions to a new era.

A legacy that divided Iranian society

One Tehran-based technology worker, speaking anonymously for security reasons, said Khamenei’s leadership widened political and religious divisions even within families.

Raised in a traditional religious household in Qom, the center of Shiite religious scholarship in Iran, he said he abandoned both regular prayer and support for clerical rule while still in his twenties. Today, he said, political and religious disagreements have become so severe that meaningful discussions with relatives are nearly impossible.

He described Iranian society as deeply fractured, blaming Khamenei for creating divisions that extend beyond supporters and opponents of the Islamic Republic.

Funeral ceremonies, however, presented a contrasting image. Many mourners portrayed Khamenei as a martyr whose resistance to Western pressure and Israel defined his leadership. Some participants echoed hard-line slogans opposing negotiations with Washington, while others called for retaliation following his death.

“Our goal is to prove to the world that we will not submit to oppression and tyranny, and that we will avenge the blood of our leader,” 60-year-old mourner Hossein Akbari said during the funeral in Tehran.

Three decades of expanding state power

Khamenei became Iran’s supreme leader in 1989 after the death of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, who led the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the U.S.-backed shah.

Throughout more than three decades in office, Khamenei expanded Iran’s nuclear program, developed its missile capabilities and strengthened alliances with armed groups across the Middle East while resisting international sanctions and pressure.

Domestically, he consolidated clerical rule by weakening reformist movements and significantly expanding the influence of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps across military, political and economic institutions. His government also maintained strict enforcement of religious and social regulations despite growing demands among younger Iranians for greater personal freedoms.

Protest crackdowns reshaped public opinion

Many observers view the government’s suppression of mass protests following the disputed 2009 presidential election as a defining moment of Khamenei’s rule. Security forces killed dozens while suppressing demonstrations challenging the election outcome, weakening hopes among many reform-minded Iranians that change could be achieved through political participation.

A senior adviser to reformist President Masoud Pezeshkian acknowledged last month that Iranian society had become “severely polarized” between committed supporters of the Islamic Republic and those seeking its collapse. Ali Rabiei, quoted by the state news agency IRNA, said a large segment of society remained between those competing camps and could support gradual reforms within the existing political system.

Election turnout has reflected growing public disillusionment. Participation in Iran’s most recent presidential election fell to one of the lowest levels on record, although reformist candidate Pezeshkian ultimately secured 16.3 million votes compared with 13.5 million for his hard-line rival.

January crackdown deepened public anger

Successive waves of protests since 2009 have been met with force, but January’s nationwide demonstrations became the deadliest in recent years after security forces killed thousands while suppressing protests that began over economic conditions before expanding into calls for Khamenei’s removal.

The sister of a protester killed in Tehran on Jan. 9 described Khamenei’s legacy as one of “injustice,” saying her family continues to struggle emotionally and financially following her sister’s death.

She said worsening economic conditions have added to the hardship facing ordinary families, with workers increasingly unable to afford basic necessities.

During this year’s Ashoura commemorations, videos shared on social media showed some participants carrying photographs of relatives killed during the January crackdown, reflecting a quieter form of public dissent. The authenticity of those videos could not be independently verified.

Uncertain future after Khamenei

Despite Khamenei’s death and the recent U.S.-Israeli military campaign, Iran’s leadership has remained intact. Authorities emerged from the conflict with an interim agreement with the United States that could eventually lead to sanctions relief if negotiations produce a comprehensive nuclear agreement, although the outcome remains uncertain.

A 35-year-old woman who participated in January’s protests said the interim deal represented a political success for the Islamic Republic but cautioned that ordinary Iranians would judge it by whether it produced meaningful improvements in daily life.

She also expressed concern over growing divisions among opponents of clerical rule, with some favoring rapid political change while others advocate gradual reform.

Economic hardship remains the most immediate concern for many Iranians. A 33-year-old former technology worker in Tehran said rising unemployment, inflation and falling incomes have left many families focused simply on paying for rent and food after layoffs spread through the private sector.

Governance challenges remain

Rebin Rahmani, director of the Kurdish Human Rights Network, said the Islamic Republic continued relying on security measures rather than political reforms to address mounting economic and social challenges, warning that periodic unrest was likely to continue.

Within the government, President Pezeshkian and other pragmatists hope ongoing negotiations with Washington could eventually secure sanctions relief and help revive Iran’s economy. According to the report, they currently appear to have tentative backing from Khamenei’s son and successor, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, who remains in hiding and has expressed cautious support for continued talks in a written statement.

Ali Vaez, Iran director at the International Crisis Group, said the country’s greatest challenge may emerge after wartime unity fades.

“Wartime gave the system a degree of cohesion under shared duress,” Vaez said. “But the governance challenges remain just as stark.”

As Iran moves beyond Khamenei’s rule, competing political factions now face the task of defining the future direction of the Islamic Republic while confronting persistent economic difficulties and a society that remains deeply divided.

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

Topics: Iran | Ali Khamenei | Middle East | Iranian Politics | U.S.-Iran Relations | Political Unrest | Economic Crisis | Nuclear Talks

The post Iran Confronts Deep Political Divisions as Ayatollah Ali Khamenei Is Laid to Rest appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The funeral, attended by hundreds of thousands of mourners according to the Associated Press, became a display of political unity as senior government officials, military commanders and members of the Khamenei family appeared together following weeks of heightened tensions. The ceremonies come after the Feb. 28 attack that killed the 86-year-old leader and several senior Iranian officials, setting off a regional conflict that ended with an April ceasefire.

Iran’s new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, has not appeared during the multi-day funeral ceremonies. He is believed to be in hiding after reportedly being wounded in the strike that killed his father. During the conflict, Israel targeted senior Iranian officials and previously threatened the younger Khamenei.

Senior Leadership Appears at Funeral

Ayatollah Jafar Sobhani, a 97-year-old Shiite cleric, led funeral prayers at Tehran’s Grand Mosalla. Among those attending were Khamenei’s sons Masoud, Meysam and Mostafa, who had not been seen publicly since the outbreak of the war.

President Masoud Pezeshkian, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and Esmail Qaani, commander of the Revolutionary Guard’s elite Quds Force, also attended the ceremony.

Revolutionary Guard chief Gen. Ahmad Vahidi was seen publicly for the first time since the conflict, surrounded by plainclothes security personnel while wearing a black baseball cap.

Crowds dressed in black carried portraits, banners and flags honoring Khamenei as mourners filled the prayer grounds in larger numbers than the previous day.

Calls for Retaliation Echo Through Ceremony

Many attendees chanted slogans including “Death to America” and “Death to Israel,” while some demanded retaliation for Khamenei’s killing.

Posters and graffiti displayed at the Grand Mosalla also called for the deaths of U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Poet Mohammad Rasouli, who addressed the crowd before the prayers, referred to Trump while telling mourners that “the world is no longer a good place” for the U.S. president, drawing cheers from those gathered.

Some mourners voiced support for carrying out revenge only after receiving guidance from Iran’s new supreme leader.

“I heard the call for revenge, but our leader should say what we need to do,” nurse Ziba Naderi said. “And we must listen to him.”

Another mourner, grocery worker Gholamreza Sabooni, said he attended the funeral seeking revenge over Khamenei’s death and called for action against Trump.

Diplomatic Talks Delayed After Funeral

The funeral ceremonies have also delayed diplomatic efforts between Tehran and Washington.

According to the Associated Press, the United States is continuing efforts to negotiate a permanent end to the conflict, including discussions involving Iran’s disputed nuclear program and the future of the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most strategically important shipping routes for energy exports.

The talks are expected to remain on hold until after Khamenei’s burial.

Iran is also seeking greater influence over activity in the Strait of Hormuz, demands that Washington has rejected. The two sides remain divided over Tehran’s nuclear activities as well as regional issues involving the Iran-backed Hezbollah movement in Lebanon.

A multinational maritime organization overseen by the U.S. Navy said Sunday that 70 commercial transits had been assisted through the Strait of Hormuz during the previous 72 hours, including 18 on Saturday. While maritime traffic has remained steady near Oman and Iran, it continues below levels seen before the conflict. The organization said the security threat remained “substantial” as mine-clearing and survey operations continued.

Funeral Procession Continues Across Iran

Iranian authorities plan to transport Khamenei’s body to multiple cities across Iran as well as neighboring Iraq before his burial.

His casket and those of other officials killed in the strike are scheduled to be driven through Tehran on Monday. Authorities have closed roads, restricted airspace and suspended much of daily activity during the official mourning period.

The ceremonies are expected to conclude Thursday with Khamenei’s burial at the Imam Reza shrine in Mashhad, his birthplace.

Authorities have not released official attendance figures for the funeral events, while mourning ceremonies have also taken place in cities across the country.

The coming days are expected to focus on the completion of the funeral process before diplomatic negotiations with the United States resume amid continuing disagreements over regional security and Iran’s nuclear program.

Topics: Iran | Ayatollah Khamenei | Middle East | Nuclear Talks | United States | Strait of Hormuz | Regional Security | Funeral

This report is based on reporting by The Associated Press.

The post Iran Displays Leadership Unity at Khamenei Funeral as Nuclear Talks With U.S. Remain on Hold appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

According to The Associated Press, U.S. President Donald Trump said Monday that Iran had requested a meeting with American officials and that representatives from both countries were expected to meet Tuesday in Doha.

Iran, however, publicly rejected that characterization. Senior Iranian officials insisted no direct talks with the United States had been arranged, underscoring continued uncertainty over the future of negotiations aimed at ending the conflict.

Conflicting Messages Over Qatar Meetings

Following Trump’s announcement, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner were traveling to Qatar for discussions.

Pakistan, which has served alongside Qatar as a mediator, also indicated that negotiations between Washington and Tehran were expected to resume Tuesday.

Iranian officials disputed those claims.

Senior negotiator Kazem Gharibabadi said no talks with the United States had been confirmed.

Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said Tehran’s delegation would instead meet with Qatari officials to discuss implementation of the interim agreement, including the release of frozen Iranian assets and related issues.

“There are no negotiation meetings with the U.S. side at any level scheduled in the coming days,” Baghaei said.

He added that the presence of American officials in Qatar was unrelated to Iran’s visit.

Military Activity Appears to Ease

Despite the diplomatic uncertainty, both sides appeared to suspend military operations Monday following several days of escalating attacks across the Persian Gulf.

The temporary pause follows an interim agreement reached earlier this month that calls for Iran to dilute its stockpile of enriched uranium while the United States eases sanctions and supports reopening maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz.

The agreement also provides a 60-day period for negotiators to pursue a broader settlement.

Recent fighting had disrupted one of the world’s most important energy corridors, through which roughly one-fifth of global oil shipments moved before the conflict began.

Iran conducted attacks against commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz in recent days, including a tanker carrying Qatari crude oil, prompting retaliatory U.S. airstrikes and raising concerns that negotiations could collapse.

Iran also launched drone and missile strikes targeting Bahrain and Kuwait on Sunday.

A U.S. official, speaking anonymously because of the sensitivity of the negotiations, said Washington believes both sides are currently observing a pause in hostilities and that commercial shipping is again moving through the waterway.

Frozen Iranian Assets Expected to Be Released

The U.S. official also said Qatar is preparing to release approximately $6 billion in frozen Iranian assets.

According to the official, the funds would be used to purchase American food products for the Iranian population.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed the anticipated release of the assets in remarks carried by Iran’s state-run IRNA news agency, describing the move as “a great victory for the Iranian people.”

The announcement marked one of the highest-level public acknowledgments by Iranian leadership regarding the planned transfer of the funds.

Regional Security Concerns Continue

Separately, Oman said it is discussing with Iran possible service-related fees for commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz.

Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said any charges under consideration would relate to maritime safety, pollution prevention, navigation assistance, and emergency response services rather than transit rights.

He emphasized that Oman opposes imposing transit fees because such charges are prohibited under international maritime law.

Meanwhile, tensions also emerged between Iran and France after French President Emmanuel Macron announced international coordination on mine-clearing operations in the Strait of Hormuz.

Gharibabadi responded that, under the interim agreement, only Iran is authorized to conduct demining activities in the waterway.

France and Oman later issued a joint statement reaffirming their support for free and unrestricted navigation through the strait while expressing their intention to cooperate on future demining efforts.

Lebanon Agreement Adds Another Regional Dimension

The broader regional situation remains volatile.

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun announced Monday that Lebanon intends to deploy troops across its southern border under a framework agreement reached with Israel last week.

The arrangement calls for the disarmament of the Iran-backed Hezbollah before Israeli forces withdraw from southern Lebanon.

Hezbollah has rejected the agreement and warned that attempts to implement it could trigger internal conflict within Lebanon.

While military activity between the United States and Iran has temporarily subsided, conflicting statements over direct negotiations suggest that efforts to secure a broader diplomatic settlement remain uncertain.

Tags: United States, Iran, Qatar, Donald Trump, Masoud Pezeshkian, Strait of Hormuz, Nuclear Talks, Diplomacy, Middle East, Oman, Hezbollah, Lebanon

The post U.S., Iran Pause Military Strikes but Differ on Whether Direct Talks Are Planned appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

Speaking after meetings in OBBÜRGEN, Switzerland, Vance said discussions had established a “good basis for a successful final agreement,” although key technical negotiations remain ongoing as diplomats work through complex security, economic, and political issues.

The talks come amid efforts to implement an interim agreement signed last week between the United States and Iran that established a 60-day period for negotiators to address unresolved disputes, including the future of Iran’s nuclear program and broader regional security concerns.

Strait of Hormuz Emerges as Key Negotiating Priority

One of the central issues discussed was the future operation of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategically important shipping route through which a significant portion of global energy supplies transit.

U.S. officials said progress had been made toward establishing mechanisms intended to keep maritime traffic moving through the waterway.

President Donald Trump welcomed developments related to the strait, telling reporters at the White House that efforts to ensure continued navigation were progressing positively.

Iran closed the Strait of Hormuz following U.S. and Israeli military operations launched in late February, disrupting shipping and contributing to rising fuel prices globally. Although dozens of vessels have resumed transits under the interim arrangement, officials said portions of the main route remain mined and inaccessible.

Data from analytics firm Kpler showed that 71 confirmed vessel transits occurred over the weekend, compared with the pre-conflict average of roughly 100 to 130 daily crossings.

Ships have largely avoided the central channel, instead relying on alternative northern and southern routes through Iranian and Omani waters.

Lebanon Ceasefire Viewed as Early Test

Regional security issues were also prominent during the negotiations.

Iranian officials identified the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon as a critical component of any broader settlement. Following the outbreak of hostilities between the United States, Israel, and Iran earlier this year, fighting intensified along the Israel-Lebanon frontier after Hezbollah launched attacks into northern Israel and Israeli forces expanded military operations in southern Lebanon.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said significant progress had been made toward reducing tensions in Lebanon but described implementation of a ceasefire as the first major test of the diplomatic process.

As of Monday evening, a ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah appeared to be holding.

Tilak Pokharel, spokesperson for the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), said peacekeepers had not detected offensive actions by either side since the previous day. However, he noted that military activity and airspace violations continued in some areas.

The current pause represents the longest interruption in fighting since the latest Israel-Hezbollah conflict began in early March.

Economic Measures Under Discussion

Negotiators also explored potential economic incentives linked to sanctions relief.

Vance said the United States could consider unfreezing Iranian assets as part of future arrangements, with funds potentially directed toward purchases of American agricultural products including soybeans, corn, and wheat.

According to Vance, discussions involving senior U.S. negotiators and Qatari officials examined mechanisms that would allow Iranian funds to be used for approved commercial transactions as sanctions are gradually eased.

Iran has long sought access to billions of dollars in assets frozen under international sanctions, banking restrictions, and legal disputes. Iranian officials had not publicly commented on the proposal.

Separately, the U.S. Treasury Department announced a 60-day sanctions exemption covering Iranian oil exports as part of the interim agreement. The temporary license allows imports of Iranian oil into the United States, a trade largely absent for decades.

Technical Negotiations Continue

While high-level political discussions have concluded for now, technical teams remain engaged in detailed negotiations.

Mediators from Pakistan and Qatar issued a joint statement welcoming what they described as encouraging progress during the latest round of talks.

Vance emphasized that many of the most difficult issues still require further discussion. Senior envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff are leading much of the technical work aimed at transforming the interim framework into a more comprehensive agreement.

The negotiations were occasionally disrupted by public statements from political leaders. Iranian state media reported that talks were briefly paused following remarks by President Trump that Iranian officials considered offensive. Discussions later resumed.

Before the negotiations began, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reiterated his country’s position on uranium enrichment, stating through state media that Iran would not abandon what it considers its right to pursue the activity.

Diplomatic Window Remains Open

Although negotiators reported progress, significant issues remain unresolved, including the future of Iran’s nuclear activities, sanctions relief, regional security arrangements, and the durability of ceasefires linked to the wider conflict.

Both sides have indicated that technical discussions will continue throughout the week as diplomats seek to build on the preliminary understandings reached in Switzerland.

For now, officials from the United States, Iran, and mediating countries say the focus remains on converting the current pause in hostilities into a broader and more durable regional settlement.

Tags: Iran, United States, Israel, Lebanon, Strait of Hormuz, JD Vance, Nuclear Talks, Diplomacy, Ceasefire, Regional Conflict, US-Iran Talks

The post U.S.-Iran Talks Advance as Negotiators Pursue Framework to End Regional Conflict appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The talks, facilitated by Pakistan with support from Qatari mediators, are intended to address unresolved elements of an interim agreement that halted direct hostilities between Washington and Tehran earlier this week. However, officials on both sides have signaled that progress could be difficult unless regional violence subsides.

Iran announced Saturday that it had again closed the Strait of Hormuz, citing what its military described as a failure by the United States to fulfill commitments related to ending hostilities involving Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The strategic waterway remains one of the world’s most important energy transit routes, making any disruption a matter of global economic concern.

U.S. officials disputed Tehran’s claim. A spokesperson for U.S. Central Command stated that commercial shipping continued to move through the strait and that American forces were monitoring the area to ensure freedom of navigation. According to the military, dozens of merchant vessels carrying more than 17 million barrels of oil transited the waterway on Saturday.

The disagreement emerged just hours before negotiators arrived in Switzerland. Iranian state television showed members of Tehran’s delegation landing in the country, led by parliamentary Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf and including Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi alongside senior economic and energy officials.

On the U.S. side, Vice President JD Vance departed for Switzerland Saturday evening. Before leaving, he expressed optimism about discussions concerning Iran’s nuclear activities and efforts to secure a ceasefire in southern Lebanon. He confirmed that senior negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff were already participating in discussions.

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and army chief Field Marshal Asim Munir also traveled to Switzerland as diplomatic efforts intensified.

Regional Conflict Threatens Negotiations

Iranian officials have indicated that implementation of a final agreement depends on commitments being honored by all parties involved.

Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei said negotiations toward a permanent arrangement would proceed only after key obligations are fulfilled, warning that failure to do so could place the broader understanding at risk.

The interim agreement signed earlier this week between U.S. President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian established a 60-day framework for negotiating a comprehensive nuclear accord. As part of the arrangement, Washington lifted restrictions on Iranian ports and allowed Iran to resume oil exports while discussions continue.

Trump responded to Iran’s latest Strait of Hormuz announcement by warning that the United States could impose transit tolls in the waterway if a permanent agreement is not reached within the negotiation period. He described the proposed charges as compensation for American security efforts in the region.

Lebanon Remains Central Obstacle

Efforts to sustain diplomacy have been complicated by continued clashes between Israel and Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

A Hezbollah official told The Associated Press that Iran had informed the group it would not reopen the Strait of Hormuz until Israel publicly committed to a comprehensive ceasefire in Lebanon and ended military operations there. The official also stated that Hezbollah would halt attacks if Israel agreed to stop its military campaign.

Later Saturday, an Israeli military official said the armed forces had received updated instructions from political leaders to cease offensive operations while maintaining defensive capabilities and retaining the right to respond to attacks.

The official also reported that five Israeli soldiers had been killed during the previous 48 hours in southern Lebanon.

Neither Israel nor Hezbollah is a formal participant in the U.S.-Iran agreement currently under negotiation.

Civilian Casualties Continue to Rise

Despite diplomatic efforts, violence persisted across southern Lebanon on Saturday.

Lebanon’s National News Agency reported that Israeli strikes killed at least 16 people, including two children. Several individuals were reported trapped beneath collapsed buildings following attacks on Nabatiyeh and nearby communities.

Israeli military officials stated that Hezbollah launched more than 50 projectiles toward Israeli positions overnight. In response, the Israeli military said it conducted strikes against Hezbollah fighters and infrastructure throughout southern Lebanon.

Lebanon’s Health Ministry later announced that fatalities linked to the latest conflict between Israel and Hezbollah had surpassed 4,000.

The conflict escalated shortly after U.S. and Israeli strikes targeted Iran on Feb. 28. Since then, Hezbollah has launched rockets and drones toward northern Israel, while Israeli forces have expanded operations in parts of southern Lebanon.

Further U.S.-supported discussions involving Lebanon and Israel are expected to take place in Washington next week.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has maintained that Israeli forces will remain in southern Lebanon until security threats are eliminated. Hezbollah, meanwhile, has insisted it will continue military operations unless Israel commits to a withdrawal.

Uncertainty Ahead

Residents on both sides of the border expressed skepticism that hostilities would end quickly despite growing diplomatic activity.

While many civilians hope a ceasefire could bring stability to communities devastated by months of fighting, continued military exchanges underscore the challenges facing negotiators as they attempt to secure both a broader U.S.-Iran agreement and a lasting reduction in regional violence.

With talks set to begin in Switzerland, the success of the diplomatic effort may depend as much on developments in Lebanon as on negotiations surrounding Iran’s nuclear program.

Tags: Iran, United States, Lebanon, Israel, Hezbollah, Strait of Hormuz, Nuclear Talks, Diplomacy

The post US-Iran Talks Set for Switzerland as Hormuz Dispute and Lebanon Fighting Complicate Diplomacy appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

U.S. officials said American forces intercepted several Iranian one-way attack drones before striking a ground control station near the southern Iranian port city of Bandar Abbas. Reuters and AP reported that the operation was characterized by U.S. officials as a “defensive” action intended to prevent additional drone launches and protect maritime traffic in the strategically vital waterway.

Speaking during a Cabinet meeting, Trump said Iran’s economy and military position had weakened significantly, adding that Tehran was “negotiating on fumes.” The president also indicated he was not rushing to finalize a diplomatic agreement despite continued negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program and regional security issues.

Strait of Hormuz Remains Flashpoint

The latest confrontation centered on the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important oil shipping routes. U.S. officials told Reuters that Iranian drones were launched toward vessels operating in the area before American aircraft destroyed the drones and targeted their control infrastructure.

The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. fighter aircraft including F-16s, F/A-18s, and F-35s participated in the operation. No casualties were immediately reported.

The military exchange came only days after U.S. Central Command acknowledged carrying out earlier “self-defense” strikes in southern Iran involving missile launch sites and vessels allegedly attempting to place naval mines. American officials stated those operations were conducted while trying to maintain what they described as a fragile ceasefire environment.

Nuclear Talks Continue Despite Military Pressure

Diplomatic discussions between Washington and Tehran have continued even as military tensions intensified. AP and Reuters reported that negotiations involve proposals tied to Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, sanctions relief, and regional security guarantees.

However, major disagreements remain unresolved. The White House rejected Iranian state media reports claiming a draft peace framework had already been reached, calling those reports “fabrication.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio said negotiators had made “some progress” but emphasized that the United States remained prepared to continue military operations if diplomacy failed.

Trump also signaled that any broader agreement could include expanded participation in the Abraham Accords, the U.S.-brokered normalization agreements between Israel and several Arab states. AP reporting indicated that regional governments have responded cautiously to those proposals amid fears that sanctions relief could strengthen Iran’s military and allied armed groups.

Regional Uncertainty Deepens

The conflict between the United States and Iran has continued for nearly three months following large-scale U.S. and Israeli operations earlier this year targeting Iranian military and nuclear infrastructure. Since then, repeated clashes at sea and in the air have raised concerns about broader regional escalation and disruptions to global energy markets.

Iranian officials have publicly accused Washington of undermining negotiations through continued military actions, while U.S. officials argue the strikes are limited defensive responses to immediate threats. Independent verification of some battlefield claims remains unavailable.

Regional allies and global markets continue monitoring the situation closely because any prolonged disruption in the Strait of Hormuz could affect international oil supplies and shipping routes. Details about future diplomatic progress remain uncertain as both military operations and negotiations continue simultaneously.

The post US Launches New Strike on Iran as Trump Signals Pressure on Nuclear Talks appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

What is known so far suggests that several intermediaries are attempting to establish a framework that could reduce direct military confrontation between Iran and its adversaries. Yet the broader structure of any long-term settlement — including enforcement mechanisms, regional security guarantees, sanctions issues, and the future of proxy conflicts — remains unclear.

The conflict has already reshaped regional calculations across the Middle East, disrupted energy markets, and intensified concerns among global powers about wider instability. According to reporting from Reuters, AP News, and BBC News, multiple diplomatic channels involving Gulf states, European governments, and international organizations have been active in recent weeks, although few official documents have been released publicly.

The emerging negotiations reflect a familiar pattern in Middle Eastern diplomacy: military escalation often creates pressure for de-escalation, but durable agreements remain difficult because the underlying disputes are deeply structural. The conflict surrounding Iran is not limited to a single battlefield or political disagreement. It is tied to decades of regional rivalry, sanctions disputes, nuclear concerns, proxy warfare, and competing security doctrines.

Understanding what is known — and what remains uncertain — requires examining both the immediate diplomatic process and the broader geopolitical systems shaping it.

The Immediate Focus Appears to Be De-Escalation

Current diplomatic efforts appear centered primarily on reducing the risk of a broader regional war rather than resolving every underlying dispute. According to Reuters reporting, mediators from Gulf countries and European governments have been involved in indirect communications designed to prevent further escalation.

Several governments have publicly emphasized the need for restraint, particularly after strikes and retaliatory attacks increased fears of a wider confrontation involving regional militias, strategic shipping routes, and foreign military installations. AP News reporting has highlighted concerns among Western and Arab governments that a prolonged conflict could destabilize energy supplies and trigger broader economic disruption.

At present, the known goals of the talks appear limited. Diplomats and analysts cited by major international outlets suggest negotiators are focusing on several short-term objectives:

• Reducing direct military exchanges
• Establishing communication channels
• Preventing attacks on critical infrastructure
• Limiting escalation involving regional proxy groups
• Creating conditions for broader political negotiations

However, no comprehensive peace framework has been publicly confirmed. It also remains unclear whether all parties involved share the same understanding of what a successful agreement would entail.

The Nuclear Issue Remains Central

One of the largest unanswered questions involves Iran’s nuclear program and whether it will become part of any final agreement.

For years, tensions surrounding Iran’s nuclear activities have shaped relations between Tehran, Western governments, and regional rivals. The collapse or weakening of earlier diplomatic arrangements, including aspects of the 2015 nuclear agreement, contributed to growing mistrust between the parties.

According to the International Atomic Energy Agency and reporting from the Financial Times and Reuters, concerns over uranium enrichment levels, monitoring access, and compliance mechanisms remain unresolved. Some governments continue to argue that military tensions cannot be separated from nuclear negotiations because security concerns are deeply interconnected.

Yet it remains uncertain whether the emerging deal under discussion would attempt to revive broader nuclear diplomacy or instead focus narrowly on military de-escalation. Analysts cited by Bloomberg and BBC News have noted that negotiators may initially pursue a limited agreement to reduce immediate violence before addressing more politically difficult nuclear issues.

This distinction matters because temporary ceasefire arrangements are often easier to negotiate than long-term strategic settlements.

Regional Powers Have Competing Priorities

Another major uncertainty involves the role of regional governments whose interests do not always align.

Iran’s relationships with Gulf Arab states have evolved significantly in recent years. Some governments in the region have pursued cautious diplomatic normalization with Tehran, partly to reduce the risks associated with direct confrontation. China-brokered diplomatic engagement between Iran and Saudi Arabia demonstrated that regional actors increasingly favor stability over open conflict, particularly when economic modernization plans depend on predictable security conditions.

At the same time, deep mistrust persists.

Several governments remain concerned about Iran’s regional influence through allied militias and armed political movements operating across multiple countries. According to Reuters and AP reporting, issues involving Lebanon, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, and maritime security continue to complicate negotiations.

Israel’s position also remains central. Israeli officials have consistently argued that any arrangement involving Iran must address long-term security threats, including missile capabilities and regional military networks. However, public details regarding Israel’s role in any emerging diplomatic framework remain limited.

The United States likewise faces competing pressures. Washington has sought to prevent wider regional escalation while maintaining longstanding security commitments to allies. Analysts cited by the Financial Times note that American policymakers must balance military deterrence with diplomatic engagement, particularly ahead of politically sensitive domestic and international developments.

Proxy Conflicts Complicate Any Settlement

One of the greatest obstacles to a lasting agreement is the fragmented nature of conflict across the region.

Unlike traditional interstate wars involving clearly defined fronts, tensions involving Iran often operate through networks of allied armed groups, political movements, and regional partnerships. These relationships make negotiations more complex because violence can continue even when governments formally support de-escalation.

According to BBC and Reuters reporting, armed groups aligned with Iran have played significant roles in conflicts across the Middle East. Meanwhile, Iran has consistently argued that many of these organizations operate independently and reflect local political realities rather than direct centralized control.

This creates a fundamental diplomatic challenge.

Even if major governments agree to reduce direct hostilities, it may prove difficult to ensure compliance across multiple theaters simultaneously. Past ceasefire efforts in the region have sometimes collapsed because local actors interpreted agreements differently or pursued separate strategic goals.

Questions also remain about enforcement mechanisms. No detailed public information has emerged regarding monitoring systems, verification arrangements, or consequences for violations.

Economic Pressures Are Driving Diplomacy

Economic concerns appear to be playing an important role in the push toward negotiations.

The Middle East remains central to global energy markets, and even limited disruptions can affect oil prices, shipping costs, inflation, and international trade. According to World Bank and IMF assessments cited by major financial publications, prolonged regional instability can create ripple effects far beyond the immediate conflict zone.

Shipping routes through strategically important waterways have become a particular concern. Attacks or threats involving maritime trade corridors have increased insurance costs and raised fears of supply chain disruption.

Iran itself also faces economic pressures tied to sanctions, inflation, and domestic financial strain. Meanwhile, neighboring countries pursuing long-term development programs have strong incentives to avoid prolonged instability.

Financial Times reporting has noted that Gulf economies increasingly prioritize economic diversification, foreign investment, and infrastructure expansion. Large-scale regional conflict threatens those objectives.

This does not necessarily mean economic interests alone can produce a durable settlement. However, they may increase incentives for temporary compromise.

Historical Distrust Continues to Shape Negotiations

The history of failed or incomplete agreements continues to influence current diplomacy.

Over several decades, negotiations involving Iran and Western or regional governments have repeatedly encountered setbacks tied to implementation disputes, political transitions, and shifting security conditions. Earlier nuclear agreements, regional ceasefires, and backchannel arrangements often produced temporary reductions in tension without fully resolving underlying rivalries.

According to analysts cited by Reuters and Bloomberg, this history contributes to skepticism among negotiators and regional observers alike.

Trust deficits appear especially significant in three areas:

• Verification of military commitments
• Long-term sanctions policy
• Regional security guarantees

Some governments fear that temporary de-escalation could allow adversaries to regroup strategically. Others worry that limited agreements may fail to address broader security threats.

This helps explain why public statements from involved governments have often remained cautious and carefully worded.

What Remains Unknown

Despite growing discussion about a possible deal, major questions remain unanswered.

Among the most significant uncertainties:

• Whether negotiations involve a formal written agreement
• Which governments are directly participating
• Whether proxy groups would be included
• How compliance would be monitored
• Whether sanctions relief is under consideration
• If nuclear negotiations will be formally linked
• What role major powers such as the United States, China, or Russia may ultimately play

It is also unclear how durable any arrangement would be if reached.

Middle Eastern diplomacy has historically produced both significant breakthroughs and rapid reversals. Agreements often depend not only on formal terms but also on regional political conditions, leadership calculations, domestic pressures, and developments on the ground.

As a result, analysts continue to caution against assuming that preliminary diplomatic contacts automatically guarantee long-term stability.

Why the Emerging Deal Matters Globally

The significance of the negotiations extends beyond the Middle East.

A wider regional war involving Iran could affect global energy markets, international shipping, refugee flows, defense spending, and relations among major powers. International organizations, including the United Nations, have repeatedly warned about the humanitarian and economic consequences of prolonged instability.

The conflict also intersects with broader geopolitical competition. Relations involving the United States, China, Russia, and European governments increasingly shape regional diplomacy, investment patterns, and security partnerships.

According to reporting from Reuters and BBC News, many governments now view regional de-escalation as critical to avoiding simultaneous global crises during a period already marked by economic uncertainty and geopolitical fragmentation.

The emerging diplomatic effort therefore represents more than a local ceasefire discussion. It reflects a broader attempt to contain instability within an increasingly interconnected international system.

Conclusion

What is currently known about the emerging deal to end the Iran war remains limited but significant. Diplomatic channels appear active, several governments are pushing for de-escalation, and economic and security pressures are creating incentives for negotiation. The immediate focus seems centered on preventing broader regional conflict rather than achieving a comprehensive political settlement.

Yet major uncertainties persist. It remains unclear whether negotiators can address deeper disputes involving nuclear policy, regional militias, sanctions, and long-standing security rivalries. Questions surrounding enforcement, compliance, and political trust also remain unresolved. As international diplomacy continues, the situation illustrates both the urgency of de-escalation and the enduring complexity of Middle Eastern geopolitics.

Sources referenced:
Reuters, Associated Press (AP), BBC News, Financial Times, Bloomberg, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF)

The post What We Know — and Still Don’t Know — About the Emerging Deal to End the Iran War appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

According to a report by The Associated Press, Pakistani officials have accelerated backchannel communications with both Washington and Tehran, seeking to prevent a complete collapse of dialogue that had shown tentative signs of revival. The U.S. decision, made without a detailed public explanation, has prompted concerns among regional stakeholders that the diplomatic process could lose coherence at a critical moment.

The shift comes as tensions across the Middle East remain elevated, with maritime security concerns and proxy dynamics continuing to test the limits of deterrence.

Diplomatic Vacuum Deepens as U.S. Steps Back

Washington’s absence from the negotiating table has created a vacuum that Pakistan is now attempting to fill, positioning itself as a temporary intermediary capable of maintaining continuity. However, Islamabad’s role remains constrained by limited leverage over core U.S. strategic calculations.

Pakistani officials are reportedly urging both sides to preserve communication channels, warning that a breakdown in talks could rapidly translate into heightened military posturing in the region. The absence of direct U.S. participation complicates efforts to achieve clarity on key issues, particularly nuclear compliance and sanctions relief.

This interruption in formal diplomacy signals a broader recalibration in U.S. engagement strategy, one that risks undermining confidence among partners relying on predictable negotiation frameworks.

Strategic Misalignment Raises Stakes for Regional Stability

The decision to withhold envoys appears to reflect internal divisions within the U.S. administration over the direction of Iran policy. This divergence has introduced an additional layer of uncertainty into negotiations already burdened by mistrust and competing timelines.

Iranian officials, while not formally withdrawing from talks, have signaled skepticism about the viability of progress without consistent U.S. representation. The lack of clarity from Washington has reinforced Tehran’s concerns about negotiating reliability, further complicating the path forward.

Pakistan’s intervention underscores the extent to which regional actors are being drawn into managing the consequences of great-power inconsistency. While Islamabad has previously facilitated dialogue in similar contexts, the current environment presents higher stakes due to overlapping security flashpoints.

Economic and Security Pressures Converge Around Gulf Corridor

The diplomatic disruption arrives at a moment when economic and security pressures are tightly intertwined. The Gulf region, particularly key maritime routes, remains vulnerable to disruptions that could have immediate global energy implications.

Analysts note that uncertainty surrounding U.S.–Iran engagement tends to correlate with increased volatility in shipping corridors, including those critical to oil transit. Pakistan’s outreach reflects an awareness that even incremental diplomatic setbacks can carry disproportionate economic consequences.

By attempting to sustain dialogue, Islamabad is also signaling its interest in preventing broader regional destabilization that could impact its own economic and security environment.

Regional Mediators Face Limits of Influence

Despite Pakistan’s proactive posture, its ability to shape outcomes remains limited by structural constraints. Unlike major powers directly involved in the dispute, Islamabad lacks the capacity to enforce commitments or offer significant economic incentives.

Still, its involvement highlights a growing reliance on middle-power diplomacy to manage crises where primary actors step back. This dynamic introduces both opportunities and risks: while it can prevent immediate breakdowns, it may also delay necessary decisions by the principal parties.

The current situation illustrates how gaps in leadership at the highest levels can cascade into broader systemic uncertainty, requiring ad hoc interventions to maintain even minimal diplomatic continuity.

Negotiation Trajectory Hinges on U.S. Reengagement

The immediate future of the talks now depends largely on whether Washington reenters the process with a clear mandate and negotiating framework. Without that, Pakistan’s mediation may only serve as a temporary stabilizing measure rather than a pathway to resolution.

Iran, for its part, appears to be weighing its options carefully, balancing the desire to avoid escalation with skepticism about the durability of any potential agreement under shifting U.S. policy conditions.

If the current impasse persists, the risk is not simply diplomatic stagnation but a gradual erosion of the mechanisms that have historically prevented open confrontation. In that context, Pakistan’s intervention may delay escalation—but cannot substitute for direct engagement between the principal actors.

The post Pakistan Steps In as U.S.–Iran Diplomacy Falters Under Sudden U.S. Pullback appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.

The strike unfolded against the backdrop of stalled diplomacy over Iran’s nuclear program and heightened military deployments across the Middle East. Regional airspace closures and emergency alerts in both countries underscored the risk of broader confrontation.

While the full scale of the operation and potential casualties remained unclear, the attack signals a significant shift from shadow conflict toward overt military action at a moment of acute geopolitical tension.

Strikes Reported in Tehran and Beyond

Iranian state media reported explosions in multiple locations nationwide, with one apparent strike occurring near the offices of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in central Tehran. Roads leading to his compound were reportedly closed by authorities as additional blasts echoed across the capital.

It was not immediately clear whether Khamenei, 86, was present at the time. He has not appeared publicly in recent days as tensions with the United States have intensified.

In neighboring Iraq, authorities closed national airspace, citing security concerns. Iran also shut down its airspace, and mobile phone services were reportedly cut in parts of the country as the situation developed.

U.S. Participation and Strategic Context

Two U.S. sources familiar with the matter said Washington was participating in the operation, though the extent of American involvement was not immediately detailed. The White House declined to comment publicly.

The strike comes after the United States positioned additional fighter aircraft and warships in the region in recent weeks, moves widely seen as an effort to increase pressure on Tehran amid stalled negotiations over its nuclear program.

Former President Donald Trump had previously sought an agreement to constrain Iran’s nuclear activities, arguing that Tehran’s domestic challenges presented leverage for a diplomatic breakthrough. Iran maintains that it has the right to enrich uranium under international law and has rejected expanding talks to include its ballistic missile program or its support for regional armed groups.

Those groups include Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon, both of which Israel considers significant security threats.

The nuclear issue has remained a central flashpoint since the collapse of earlier agreements aimed at limiting Iran’s uranium enrichment activities in exchange for sanctions relief. Diplomacy has stalled repeatedly, and military signaling on both sides has intensified in recent months.

Israeli Military Response and Civil Defense Measures

Israel’s Defense Minister, Israel Katz, described the operation as an effort “to remove threats,” without providing operational details.

As sirens sounded across Israel, the military issued what it called a “proactive alert” to prepare the public for the possibility of retaliatory missile fire. Israeli authorities closed the country’s airspace and activated emergency protocols nationwide.

Several hospitals moved patients and ongoing surgeries to fortified underground facilities, a precaution frequently taken during periods of heightened security risk. The measures reflect longstanding concerns that Iran or its regional allies could respond with missile or drone attacks targeting Israeli territory.

Uncertainty Over Retaliation

Iran has previously warned that any direct attack involving the United States would put American military personnel and bases in the region at risk. U.S. forces are stationed across multiple Gulf states, as well as in Iraq and Syria.

It was not immediately clear whether Tehran would respond directly or through allied groups. Iranian officials have yet to release casualty figures or detailed assessments of the damage.

The strike appears to represent one of the most overt confrontations between Israel and Iran in recent years, moving beyond the shadow campaign of cyber operations, covert actions, and targeted strikes that have characterized much of their rivalry.

A Region on Edge

The Middle East has experienced repeated cycles of escalation tied to Iran’s nuclear program and its regional alliances. Diplomatic efforts led by world powers have aimed to curb enrichment levels and expand monitoring, but disagreements over scope and sequencing have stalled progress.

Saturday’s events add a new layer of uncertainty to those efforts. Airspace closures in multiple countries and heightened alert levels across the region suggest governments are bracing for possible spillover.

With communication lines strained and military forces on heightened readiness, the coming hours are likely to determine whether the confrontation remains contained or widens into a broader regional crisis.

Source: AP News – Israel launches attack on Iran’s capital with US help as tensions high over nuclear talks

The post Israel Launches Strike on Tehran as U.S. Backs Operation Amid Nuclear Tensions appeared first on Journos News - Breaking News, World News, Top Stories, Todays Headlines and Flash Reports.