Iran has turned down a ceasefire proposal delivered by Pakistan on behalf of the United States, instead presenting a five-point counter-proposal that includes demands Washington is unlikely to accept. Iranian state media cited an anonymous official confirming the rejection, stating that Tehran would end the conflict only on its own terms. The move signals a hardening of Iran’s negotiating position even as intermediaries scramble to keep diplomatic channels alive.
The US proposal, reportedly a 15-point plan, included sanctions relief for Iran, the dismantling of its nuclear programme, restrictions on missile use, and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. These terms had already proved contentious in pre-war negotiations. Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi acknowledged receiving the proposals but said his country had “no intention of negotiating for now.”
Iran’s counter-proposal demanded a complete end to hostilities, guarantees against future attacks, reparations for damages suffered, and Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz. The latter point alone makes the plan almost certainly unacceptable to the US. Despite the apparent deadlock, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said discussions were ongoing and “productive.”
Donald Trump, speaking at a Washington fundraiser, insisted Iran was eager to make a deal but was publicly reluctant to admit it. He claimed Iranian leaders feared their own population’s reaction to talks. Meanwhile, China’s foreign minister Wang Yi urged dialogue through separate calls with his Egyptian and Turkish counterparts, describing the moment as offering “a glimmer of hope for peace.”
The broader military situation remains dire. The US military claimed it had struck more than 10,000 targets, destroying 92% of Iran’s largest naval vessels and two-thirds of its missile and drone production facilities. Israeli forces continued bombing Iran, including strikes near Isfahan, while Iran launched retaliatory missile and drone attacks on Israel and Gulf states. The path to peace remains narrow, contested, and deeply uncertain.