IT’S a challenging task to decipher US President Donald Trump’s ever-changing statements on war and peace. His recent posts on social media and various media interviews with him have left us bewildered. The remarks are puzzling and compound the prevailing uncertainty surrounding the next round of US-Iran talks. The president’s constant self-aggrandisement has made it hard to believe anything he says. It is both comical and dangerous.
While insisting that he has achieved all war objectives, Trump continues to threaten Iran with more destruction if it does not comply with his demands. (Absurdly, he believes that his ‘peacemaking’ efforts deserve a Nobel Prize and recently said that the Lebanon-Israel ‘ceasefire’ was his 10th achievement in the context of conflict resolution.) Trump’s coercive diplomacy has failed to subdue Iran, which has endured weeks of relentless bombing and the loss of its top religious, civil and military leadership, but has refused to engage in talks under the shadow of threats.
Trump’s refusal to lift a naval blockade and the US interception of an Iranian cargo ship have jeopardised the tentative peace process mediated by Pakistan. Mixed messages of escalation and optimism emanating from the White House appear to be a deliberate strategy aimed at influencing global markets. The sharp fluctuations in the oil and stock markets following his remarks reinforce this view.
There is now a serious danger of escalation, with diminishing prospects for the resumption of talks in Islamabad after the expiration of the fragile ceasefire. Can Trump be stopped from unleashing yet another catastrophic round of hostilities, which would have global implications? His dream of winning both war and peace may remain unfulfilled as he confronts a tenacious and resolute adversary in Iran.
A major question at the moment is whether the ceasefire, characterised by a ‘fog of peace’, will last beyond today. Predicting outcomes in the current state of uncertainty is challenging. Islamabad is prepared to host another round of peace talks, but it is uncertain if the participants will attend. Even if they do, the likelihood of both sides agreeing to a substantive peace deal seems remote, given the widening trust gap between them. Iran’s distrust of Trump is not unfounded; in less than a year, the Islamic Republic faced two attacks by America and Israel in the midst of negotiations.
Any of these actions would exacerbate the global energy crisis. The Iranians understand that the current blockage of Hormuz will have increasingly severe effects on the world economy and may intensify pressure on the Trump administration via the international community to exercise restraint. However, no one can be sure of what Trump will do next.
Tehran demonstrated flexibility during the first round of talks in Islamabad, including on the nuclear issue, which is viewed as the main sticking point obstructing a deal. Tehran ended the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz after Israel agreed to a ceasefire in Lebanon, anticipating that the US would reciprocate by suspending its naval blockade of Iranian ports. However, not only did the US not lift the blockade, it reportedly also seized an Iranian ship mid-sea, escalating tensions. Despite Pakistan’s mediation efforts that initially appeared to have persuaded Tehran to participate in the second round of talks in Islamabad, America’s provocations have forced Iran to reconsider.
There appears to have been a miscalculation on Trump’s part that the blockade would force Iran to capitulate. Instead, America’s escalatory actions, coupled with Trump’s threatening messages, have hardened Iran’s stance. In retaliation, Iran has reimposed its blockade of the strait, and there have been incidents where Iran’s Revolutionary Guard have fired at ships attempting to cross it. It is evident that hard-liners are now dominating the decision-making in Tehran.
There remains a possibility of Iran joining the talks in Islamabad at the last moment, provided Washington lifts its naval blockade and extends the ceasefire. Iran would also seek an international guarantee against attacks during negotiations, as has happened in the past. Despite Trump’s decision to send Vice-President J.D. Vance to Islamabad, his threatening rhetoric continues, further weakening the position of moderate elements within Iran’s power structure. Besides, the inclusion of Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff in the US team may not bode well for a potential breakthrough. The two were part of past negotiations with Tehran, in the midst of which Iran was attacked. Their presence won’t help bridge the trust gap essential for substantive negotiations.
Trump has threatened to escalate military actions by “knocking out every single power plant and every single bridge in Iran” if the talks fail to deliver. In this scenario, Iran is not expected to remain passive; Tehran has warned that it would retaliate rather than surrender.
Despite significant damage to Iran’s infrastructure, the country’s defence forces remain capable of retaliating effectively against Israeli and American interests in the region. Such retaliation could involve attacks on oil refineries and offshore platforms in US-allied Gulf countries or further encourage Yemen’s Houthis who have threatened to block the Bab al-Mandeb waterway.
There is now a serious danger of escalation, with diminishing prospects for the resumption of talks in Islamabad after the expiration of the fragile ceasefire. Can Trump be stopped from unleashing yet another catastrophic round of hostilities, which would have global implications? His dream of winning both war and peace may remain unfulfilled as he confronts a tenacious and resolute adversary in Iran.
Any of these actions would exacerbate the global energy crisis. The Iranians understand that the current blockage of Hormuz will have increasingly severe effects on the world economy and may intensify pressure on the Trump administration via the international community to exercise restraint. However, no one can be sure of what Trump will do next.
The coming days may see periods of escalation interspersed with talks, sometimes concurrent processes, as Iran and the US test each other’s resolve. Some issues will be easier to find a solution to than others, especially if the US and its ally Israel do not resume their attacks. The nuclear issue could be easily addressed if Trump is serious about a negotiated long-term peace deal. Iran has repeatedly stated that it is not seeking to build a nuclear bomb, but that it will not agree to relinquish its right under international law to enrich uranium for civilian use. Trump had earlier said that Iran would agree to an indefinite moratorium. There are uncertainties, particularly regarding Israel’s potential role as spoiler. Nothing is certain in Trump’s world order of chaos.
This article was first published under the title “The fog over peace talks ” in Dawn, an ANN partner of The Daily Star, on April 22, 2026.
Zahid Hussain is an author and journalist.
Send your articles for Slow Reads to [email protected]. Check out our submission guidelines for details.
