U.S. and Iran are closer to a deal than they appear, with talks focused on a staged process starting with Hormuz reopening, though mediators warn the next few days are critical. (Via CNN)
Summary
- The U.S. and Iran are not as far apart as they seem, according to sources familiar with the mediation process, despite a second round of talks in Pakistan failing to take place
- Ongoing diplomacy is centred on a staged process in which the first part of any deal would focus on returning to the pre-war status quo and reopening the Strait of Hormuz without restrictions or tolls
- Iran’s nuclear programme, cited by both the U.S. and Israel as their casus belli, would be addressed in a later stage of any agreement
- Trump has previously demanded Iran forfeit its near bomb-grade uranium stockpile and abandon enrichment, conditions Tehran has consistently refused
- Mediators are pressing both sides hard, with the next few days described as especially crucial to the process
- The prospect of the U.S. disengaging and returning to war remains a live risk hanging over the entire negotiation
Intense behind-the-scenes diplomacy between the United States and Iran is advancing around a staged peace framework that would prioritise reopening the Strait of Hormuz before tackling the harder question of Tehran’s nuclear programme, according to sources familiar with the mediation process.
The development comes despite a second round of formal talks in Pakistan failing to materialise, a setback that had led some observers to conclude the negotiating track was stalling. Sources close to the process say the opposite is true, describing the two sides as closer to an agreement than the public picture suggests.
The framework under discussion would begin by restoring the pre-war status quo and securing unrestricted passage through the Strait of Hormuz, free of tolls or conditions. That alone would represent a significant development for global energy markets, which have been severely disrupted by the effective closure of one of the world’s most critical oil and gas chokepoints since hostilities began.
The nuclear question, which both Washington and Tel Aviv cited as justification for military action, would be left for a later stage of any agreement. That sequencing reflects the difficulty of bridging a fundamental gap: Trump has publicly insisted any deal must require Iran to surrender its stockpile of near bomb-grade uranium and abandon its enrichment programme entirely. Tehran has refused both demands and shown no sign of softening its position on either.
The decision to defer the nuclear issue rather than resolve it upfront gives the process a path forward in the short term but leaves the most consequential and contentious element unresolved. Any first-stage agreement on Hormuz would therefore be provisional in nature, with the harder work still ahead.
Mediators are said to be applying significant pressure on both delegations, with those close to the talks describing the coming days as especially crucial. The pace of back-channel diplomacy has intensified even as the formal negotiating calendar has slipped, suggesting both sides retain enough interest in an outcome to keep the process alive.
What remains uncertain is whether that interest will hold. Hanging over the entire negotiation is the possibility that the U.S. decides to disengage and return to active military operations, a scenario that has not been ruled out and that would reshape the energy market outlook dramatically. For now, cautious progress continues, but the margin for error on all sides is thin.
—
The staged framework described here keeps uncertainty elevated. The confirmation that Hormuz reopening is the priority first step is significant: even a partial or provisional agreement on shipping access could take meaningful risk premium out of crude prices quickly. However, the caveat that the U.S. may yet disengage and return to war is a sharp reminder that this remains a fragile process. The nuclear question being deferred rather than resolved adds a longer tail of geopolitical risk
