Iran International
Hope for a limited US-Iran agreement gained momentum Friday as regional mediators intensified efforts to stabilize the ceasefire, but the fragile diplomacy faced hostility from Iranian hardliners who cast negotiations as a prelude to renewed conflict.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei said Friday morning that despite growing speculation surrounding the talks, “no significant progress” had been made.
Diplomatic sources say discussions have focused on a possible memorandum of understanding envisioned as a first step toward broader negotiations, including over Iran’s nuclear program.
The proposed framework would reportedly seek to stabilize the ceasefire and establish mechanisms for managing shipping and navigation disputes in the Strait of Hormuz.
Such an arrangement could provide both sides with temporary political breathing room while reducing pressure on global energy markets already shaken by weeks of conflict and shipping disruptions.
But neither Tehran nor Washington has ruled out military escalation if negotiations collapse before an agreement is finalized.
The Trump administration was preparing on Friday for a fresh round of military strikes against Iran, CBS reported citing sources familiar with the planning, even as indirect diplomacy continues.
The fragility of the process was also underscored Friday by continued attacks from Iranian hardliners who argue the ceasefire itself represented a strategic mistake.
Tehran University lecturer Mohammad Sadegh Koushki said in an interview with the IPTV program Zoom, affiliated with the Fararu website, that Iran had halted military operations just as it had gained the upper hand.
“It’s like a football team that is up by a goal and can score one or two more,” he said. “The momentum of battle was brought to a screeching halt under the name of negotiations and a ceasefire.”
Koushki dismissed the idea that Iran’s conflict with the United States could ultimately be resolved through diplomacy, arguing that years of negotiations had only resulted in greater sanctions and pressure.
Similar arguments appeared across hardline political circles Friday. MP Alireza Salimi said Iran’s control over the Strait of Hormuz was “not negotiable” and that Tehran alone would define and enforce the strait’s “new rules.”
Diplomatic activity nevertheless appeared to intensify throughout Friday as Pakistani Interior Minister Mohsin Naqvi returned to Tehran, with CBS citing a senior Pakistani official as saying his meetings had helped negotiations move “in an important direction,” prompting Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir to join the mediation effort.
Reuters also reported that a Qatari negotiating team arrived in Tehran in coordination with the United States to help secure an agreement aimed at ending the war and resolving outstanding disputes.
Still, similar moments of optimism earlier in 2025 and again in early 2026 ultimately collapsed into waves of US and Israeli strikes on Iran, leaving deep skepticism about the durability of diplomacy.
In a widely circulated post on X, establishment academic Foad Izadi argued that Washington had paid too little a cost for the conflict to abandon long-term pressure on Iran.
“The cycle of attack, ceasefire, negotiation and attack will repeat,” Izadi wrote, warning against rapid concessions or reopening the Strait of Hormuz too quickly.
The remarks reflected broader hardline skepticism toward the diplomatic push even as intensified mediation efforts suggested Tehran and Washington may still see a narrow path toward a limited deal.
