Tehran/Washington: Iran has laid out sweeping and stringent conditions in response to a proposal by former US president Donald Trump for renewed ceasefire negotiations, signalling a high-stakes and complex diplomatic standoff.
From demanding the closure of American military bases in the Gulf to seeking control over one of the world’s most critical oil routes, Tehran’s public stance sets a steep bar for any potential agreement.
Hardline demands from Tehran
Iranian officials have reportedly called for the shutdown of all US military bases in the Gulf region, along with financial compensation for wartime damages and the lifting of all economic sanctions imposed by Washington.
They have also demanded an end to Israel’s military campaign against Hezbollah, further broadening the scope of negotiations beyond bilateral US-Iran concerns.
Another major demand includes a framework that would allow Iran to impose transit fees on vessels passing through the Strait of Hormuz — a chokepoint through which a significant portion of the world’s oil supply flows.
Strait of Hormuz at the centre
The Strait of Hormuz has emerged as a key flashpoint in the negotiations. Iran is seeking a new arrangement that would effectively grant it greater control over the vital shipping route, alongside firm guarantees to prevent future hostilities.
Such a move could have far-reaching implications for global energy markets and international trade, given the strategic importance of the passage.
Power dynamics within Iran
Reports suggest that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) has consolidated its influence within Iran’s leadership and is playing a central role in shaping these demands.
This internal dynamic is seen as a factor behind the uncompromising tone adopted in public statements.
Signs of flexibility behind the scenes
Despite the tough rhetoric, there are indications that Tehran may be open to limited concessions in private discussions.
According to reports, Iran could consider pausing its ballistic missile programme for up to five years and reducing uranium enrichment levels. It may also allow inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and engage in talks regarding its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
Possible shift on regional proxies
Iran is also believed to be weighing a reduction in support for regional proxy groups, including Hamas and Iraqi militias, as part of a broader agreement.
Such a shift, if confirmed, would mark a significant change in Iran’s regional strategy and could influence the wider geopolitical landscape in the Middle East.
War of words continues
Amid the diplomatic manoeuvring, rhetoric between the two sides remains sharp. Iranian military spokesperson Ebrahim Zolfaqari mocked the US leadership, suggesting internal divisions in Washington.
He also warned that US economic interests would remain under pressure, adding that regional stability depends on the role of Iranian armed forces.
Uncertain road ahead
The contrasting signals — firm public demands paired with hints of flexibility — highlight the complexity of the negotiations.
With both sides testing each other’s limits, the path to a ceasefire remains uncertain. Any potential deal would not only shape US-Iran relations but also carry significant implications for global energy security and regional stability.