#美伊二轮谈判进展 Ceasefire Countdown: US-Iran Negotiations Near Collapse, War Imminent
As the final 24 hours approach for the expiration of the April 21 ceasefire agreement, the diplomatic standoff between the US and Iran has reached the brink of collapse. On the core issues of nuclear matters and passage rights through the Strait of Hormuz, the fundamental disagreements have not only remained unresolved but have worsened over the past 48 hours due to the dramatic reversal of the Strait "opening and closing," further escalating tensions.
Currently, due to the US seizing Iranian ships, Iran has refused the second round of negotiations. Trump has threatened to "drop bombs again," and the Iranian military has announced it is ready with a new missile—production date May 2026—pushing the Middle East toward a new round of military escalation.
1. The "Game" at the Negotiation Table: Optimistic Words and Cold Reality
Over the past week, US-Iran negotiations have shown a contradictory "dual image": publicly, both sides and mediators are trying to project optimism; but behind closed doors, red lines remain clear, and mutual trust is severely lacking.
On April 11, under Pakistan’s mediation, the US and Iran held marathon talks in Islamabad lasting 21 hours. Although no agreement was reached, neither side walked away. US Vice President Vance attended on behalf of the US, while Iran was led by Speaker of Parliament Kalibaf. Since then, mediators from Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt have been working intensively to restart negotiations before the ceasefire expires. The US previously expressed clear optimism.
White House Press Secretary Leavitt said on April 16, “We feel good about the prospects of reaching an agreement.” Trump himself has repeatedly claimed that the deal is “very close.” However, this optimistic tone is largely interpreted as part of a negotiation strategy—to send positive signals to stabilize global energy markets and avoid taking responsibility for a breakdown. Iran, on the other hand, appears more cautious or even tough.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bagheri reiterated Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy use and emphasized that sanctions exemptions are a necessary part of any solution. Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei issued a rare statement saying Iran’s “brave navy is always ready to make enemies taste the bitterness of new failures.”
Currently, Iran has refused to participate in the second round of talks, seemingly prepared for a prolonged confrontation with the US. As I previously pointed out, because the extreme regime does not care if the country is thoroughly wrecked and the people suffer, they will fight to the end, until the opponent is exhausted, then declare victory.
2. The "Switch" in Hormuz: The Last Straw That Could Break the Deal
If nuclear issues are the long-standing sticking point at the negotiation table, then the passage rights through the Strait of Hormuz suddenly became the "immediate bomb" in the past week. The dramatic reversal of the strait situation within 24 hours exposed the fragility of the ceasefire and nearly derailed diplomatic efforts.
Phase One: Openness and Optimism (April 17-18)
On April 17, after the Lebanon ceasefire agreement took effect, Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi announced on social media that the Strait of Hormuz was “completely open for full passage.” This statement immediately triggered market reactions, with crude oil prices plummeting 10% within hours. Trump welcomed this and praised Iran’s decision.
Phase Two: Reversal and Escalation (April 18-19)
However, Iran’s openness came with a key condition: the US must lift the blockade on Iranian ports. When Trump explicitly stated that the US maritime blockade would “continue fully” until a “deal” with Iran was 100% completed, Tehran’s attitude sharply shifted.
On April 19, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps announced the re-sealing of the strait. The IRGC issued a statement warning: “Approaching the Strait of Hormuz will be considered cooperation with the enemy, and any violating ships will be targeted.” Parliament Speaker Kalibaf also issued a tough statement on social media: “With the continuation of the blockade, the Strait of Hormuz will not remain open.”
3. Red Lines and Demands: The Three Major Obstacles
Even if both sides sit face-to-face at the negotiation table, the three core disagreements that stand between them show no signs of being resolved.
First, the fate of highly enriched uranium. This is the most fundamental point of disagreement. Trump claimed Iran agreed to hand over all its stockpiled highly enriched uranium, but Iran flatly denied this, saying it is “absolutely impossible.” Reports indicate the US proposed to unfreeze $20 billion of Iranian assets in exchange for Iran’s uranium stock, but this proposal was directly rejected by Tehran.
Second, the retention of uranium enrichment rights. On Iran’s nuclear rights, the positions remain diametrically opposed. The US demands Iran suspend all enrichment activities for 20 years, while Iran’s counter-proposal is a 3-5 year suspension. This gap is nearly impossible to bridge in a short time. Vice President Vance explicitly stated that Iran must make a “fundamental commitment not to develop nuclear weapons,” while Iran insists its right to peaceful nuclear energy is non-negotiable.
Third, passage rights and tolls through the strait. The US insists its maritime blockade is part of its negotiation strategy to prevent Iran from using the strait as leverage. Iran views the blockade as a direct violation of its sovereignty and a breach of the ceasefire agreement, refusing to make any unilateral concessions on passage rights. The US will not agree to turn this international waterway into a printing press for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
4. The Final Hour: Is War Inevitable?
As the ceasefire expires on April 21, both sides have shown a willingness to go to war. On April 17, Trump issued the clearest threat yet: “Maybe I won’t extend it (the ceasefire), so you’ll face a blockade. Unfortunately, we will have to start dropping bombs again.” This starkly contrasts with the previous optimistic statements about “being very close” to an agreement, and is seen as maximum pressure—either concessions at the negotiation table or military action.
Iran’s side is equally unyielding. On April 18, senior Iranian officer General Naghdi said, “If war breaks out again, we will use missiles with a production date of May 2026.” This unusual statement—pre-emptively announcing future weapons’ “production date”—is considered a carefully crafted psychological tactic, meant to demonstrate Iran’s readiness for long-term confrontation. Meanwhile, Iran’s Parliament’s National Security Committee revealed that Tehran is reviewing the US’s “new proposals,” but has not yet responded.
There are reports
As the final 24 hours approach for the expiration of the April 21 ceasefire agreement, the diplomatic standoff between the US and Iran has reached the brink of collapse. On the core issues of nuclear matters and passage rights through the Strait of Hormuz, the fundamental disagreements have not only remained unresolved but have worsened over the past 48 hours due to the dramatic reversal of the Strait "opening and closing," further escalating tensions.
Currently, due to the US seizing Iranian ships, Iran has refused the second round of negotiations. Trump has threatened to "drop bombs again," and the Iranian military has announced it is ready with a new missile—production date May 2026—pushing the Middle East toward a new round of military escalation.
1. The "Game" at the Negotiation Table: Optimistic Words and Cold Reality
Over the past week, US-Iran negotiations have shown a contradictory "dual image": publicly, both sides and mediators are trying to project optimism; but behind closed doors, red lines remain clear, and mutual trust is severely lacking.
On April 11, under Pakistan’s mediation, the US and Iran held marathon talks in Islamabad lasting 21 hours. Although no agreement was reached, neither side walked away. US Vice President Vance attended on behalf of the US, while Iran was led by Speaker of Parliament Kalibaf. Since then, mediators from Pakistan, Turkey, and Egypt have been working intensively to restart negotiations before the ceasefire expires. The US previously expressed clear optimism.
White House Press Secretary Leavitt said on April 16, “We feel good about the prospects of reaching an agreement.” Trump himself has repeatedly claimed that the deal is “very close.” However, this optimistic tone is largely interpreted as part of a negotiation strategy—to send positive signals to stabilize global energy markets and avoid taking responsibility for a breakdown. Iran, on the other hand, appears more cautious or even tough.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Bagheri reiterated Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy use and emphasized that sanctions exemptions are a necessary part of any solution. Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei issued a rare statement saying Iran’s “brave navy is always ready to make enemies taste the bitterness of new failures.”
Currently, Iran has refused to participate in the second round of talks, seemingly prepared for a prolonged confrontation with the US. As I previously pointed out, because the extreme regime does not care if the country is thoroughly wrecked and the people suffer, they will fight to the end, until the opponent is exhausted, then declare victory.
2. The "Switch" in Hormuz: The Last Straw That Could Break the Deal
If nuclear issues are the long-standing sticking point at the negotiation table, then the passage rights through the Strait of Hormuz suddenly became the "immediate bomb" in the past week. The dramatic reversal of the strait situation within 24 hours exposed the fragility of the ceasefire and nearly derailed diplomatic efforts.
Phase One: Openness and Optimism (April 17-18)
On April 17, after the Lebanon ceasefire agreement took effect, Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi announced on social media that the Strait of Hormuz was “completely open for full passage.” This statement immediately triggered market reactions, with crude oil prices plummeting 10% within hours. Trump welcomed this and praised Iran’s decision.
Phase Two: Reversal and Escalation (April 18-19)
However, Iran’s openness came with a key condition: the US must lift the blockade on Iranian ports. When Trump explicitly stated that the US maritime blockade would “continue fully” until a “deal” with Iran was 100% completed, Tehran’s attitude sharply shifted.
On April 19, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps announced the re-sealing of the strait. The IRGC issued a statement warning: “Approaching the Strait of Hormuz will be considered cooperation with the enemy, and any violating ships will be targeted.” Parliament Speaker Kalibaf also issued a tough statement on social media: “With the continuation of the blockade, the Strait of Hormuz will not remain open.”
3. Red Lines and Demands: The Three Major Obstacles
Even if both sides sit face-to-face at the negotiation table, the three core disagreements that stand between them show no signs of being resolved.
First, the fate of highly enriched uranium. This is the most fundamental point of disagreement. Trump claimed Iran agreed to hand over all its stockpiled highly enriched uranium, but Iran flatly denied this, saying it is “absolutely impossible.” Reports indicate the US proposed to unfreeze $20 billion of Iranian assets in exchange for Iran’s uranium stock, but this proposal was directly rejected by Tehran.
Second, the retention of uranium enrichment rights. On Iran’s nuclear rights, the positions remain diametrically opposed. The US demands Iran suspend all enrichment activities for 20 years, while Iran’s counter-proposal is a 3-5 year suspension. This gap is nearly impossible to bridge in a short time. Vice President Vance explicitly stated that Iran must make a “fundamental commitment not to develop nuclear weapons,” while Iran insists its right to peaceful nuclear energy is non-negotiable.
Third, passage rights and tolls through the strait. The US insists its maritime blockade is part of its negotiation strategy to prevent Iran from using the strait as leverage. Iran views the blockade as a direct violation of its sovereignty and a breach of the ceasefire agreement, refusing to make any unilateral concessions on passage rights. The US will not agree to turn this international waterway into a printing press for the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.
4. The Final Hour: Is War Inevitable?
As the ceasefire expires on April 21, both sides have shown a willingness to go to war. On April 17, Trump issued the clearest threat yet: “Maybe I won’t extend it (the ceasefire), so you’ll face a blockade. Unfortunately, we will have to start dropping bombs again.” This starkly contrasts with the previous optimistic statements about “being very close” to an agreement, and is seen as maximum pressure—either concessions at the negotiation table or military action.
Iran’s side is equally unyielding. On April 18, senior Iranian officer General Naghdi said, “If war breaks out again, we will use missiles with a production date of May 2026.” This unusual statement—pre-emptively announcing future weapons’ “production date”—is considered a carefully crafted psychological tactic, meant to demonstrate Iran’s readiness for long-term confrontation. Meanwhile, Iran’s Parliament’s National Security Committee revealed that Tehran is reviewing the US’s “new proposals,” but has not yet responded.
There are reports
