What’s in Iran’s latest proposal – and how has the US responded? | US-Israel war on Iran News
The United States is evaluating a new proposal from Iran aimed at resolving the ongoing conflict between the two nations, coinciding with a fragile ceasefire. The offer includes reopening the strategic Strait of Hormuz while deferring discussions about Iran’s nuclear program, which remains a significant point of contention between Tehran and Washington.
U.S. media reports indicate that the proposal has raised concerns among officials in Washington, where skepticism has been expressed regarding its feasibility. Initial assessments from the Trump administration suggest that the plan may not be accepted in its current form, potentially prolonging the ceasefire in the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran, a situation that has resulted in numerous casualties and rising global energy prices.
Iran’s proposal seeks to de-escalate hostilities in the Gulf without committing to immediate limitations on its nuclear activities, a key demand from the U.S. Tehran has conditioned the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz on the lifting of the U.S. naval blockade on Iranian ports and the cessation of military actions.
The strait, which is vital for global oil and liquefied natural gas shipments, has been effectively closed to maritime traffic by Iran, contributing to increased energy prices and disruptions in supply chains. Nearly one-fifth of the world’s energy supplies pass through this narrow passage, establishing its importance to international trade.
In early April, shortly after the ceasefire commenced, President Trump announced a blockade on Iranian ports and vessels, further restricting Iran’s capacity to export oil and impacting its revenue.
Central to Iran’s proposal is the request to postpone negotiations concerning nuclear activities until after the conflict has been resolved. The proposal was communicated to Washington via Pakistan, which has acted as a mediator between the two nations.
Iranian state media, Fars News Agency, reported that the messages conveyed to the U.S. align with Tehran’s established red lines regarding nuclear issues and the Strait of Hormuz. The agency emphasized that these messages are not part of formal negotiations but are intended to clarify the regional situation.
Analyst Abas Aslani from the Centre for Middle East Strategic Studies described Iran’s offer as reflecting a reformed approach. He noted that Tehran views its previous strategy—offering compromises on its nuclear program in exchange for relief from economic sanctions—as no longer viable.
On the diplomatic front, Iran’s envoy to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, stated that sustainable stability in the Gulf region can only be achieved through a complete and enduring cessation of hostilities against Iran.
In response, President Trump met with top security advisers to discuss the Iranian proposal, but reports indicate that the U.S. response has been largely dismissive. An unnamed official expressed dissatisfaction with the proposal, citing the absence of provisions regarding Iran’s nuclear program.
Secretary of State Marco Rubio acknowledged the proposal’s improved nature compared to previous submissions but raised concerns about Tehran’s intentions, emphasizing the need for any agreement to prevent Iran from pursuing nuclear weapons.
Reporting from Washington, Al Jazeera’s Mike Hanna noted a lack of transparency regarding discussions within Trump’s national security team, indicating that details about the meeting have not been disclosed.
The reaction from international stakeholders has highlighted increasing impatience among Europe’s leadership. Mohamed Elmasry, an analyst at the Doha Institute of Graduate Studies, remarked that prolonged negotiations may complicate the situation further. German Chancellor Merz noted Iran’s adept negotiation strategies, signaling growing pressure on the Trump administration from allies who believe it has mishandled the situation.
The evolving dynamics underscore the complexities of the negotiations and the varying interests of involved parties as they navigate the delicate geopolitical landscape.
