Trump tells Iran: "Call us if you want to talk!" The US-Iran rivalry intensifies, and a peace agreement remains stalled despite global sanctions.
2026-04-27 09:18:27
As of April 27, 2026, the military standoff and diplomatic deadlock between Iran and the United States had lasted for two full months. Although US President Trump publicly stated his willingness to accept Iran's requests for negotiations, even offering to "make phone calls," fundamental differences remained between the two sides on core issues such as nuclear issues, maritime blockades, and regional proxy forces. Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi frequently shuttled between mediators Pakistan and Oman, attempting to create space for dialogue, while the United States continued to expand its maritime blockade of Iran and made it clear that it was "not in a hurry" to reach any agreement. This article synthesizes the latest news, providing a detailed overview of the events and the positions of all parties involved, helping readers understand this crisis that is affecting the global community.
https://upload.fx678img.com/upload/ht/20250801/2025080116425973.jpg
In a Fox News program aired on Sunday (April 26), US President Trump again addressed the Iranian leadership directly. He stated that if Iran wishes to end the current conflict through diplomatic means, it can contact the US, whether through face-to-face talks or telephone communication, and that the US has secure and reliable dedicated lines available for its use.
Trump emphasized that Iran is well aware of the core clause that the agreement must include: Tehran must not possess nuclear weapons. He further warned that if Iran does not abandon its nuclear weapons program, there is no reason for the two sides to meet.
Trump also explained to reporters in Florida why he had abruptly canceled the planned visit of special envoys Witkov and Kushner to Islamabad, Pakistan. He claimed that the visit was canceled because the negotiations involved too much travel and expense, and the initial proposal from Iran was far from sufficient.
However, Trump also admitted that after the diplomatic trip was canceled, Iran "made many demands," but still failed to meet the US's bottom line.
Iran did not show any eagerness to respond to Trump's "telephone invitation." Iranian President Pezechzian issued a clearly worded government statement during a phone call with Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz.
He emphasized that Tehran would not participate in "imposed negotiations" under any form of threat or naval blockade. Pezechian pointed out that the United States should first remove the substantial obstacles, specifically lifting the military blockade of Iranian ports. Only after the blockade is lifted can negotiators truly lay the foundation for resolving the conflict.
Iran has long insisted that Washington recognize its right to conduct uranium enrichment activities. Tehran officially claims that these activities are entirely for peaceful purposes, primarily for the production of fuel for nuclear power plants, but Western countries generally suspect that Iran's true intention is to develop nuclear weapons.
Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi returned to Islamabad on Sunday after concluding talks with Omani leaders, where he will hold a new round of consultations with Pakistani leaders before heading to Moscow.
According to Iran's semi-official Tasnim News Agency, Araghchi's discussions with Pakistani officials will focus on: establishing a new legal framework for the Strait of Hormuz, demanding compensation from the United States for economic losses caused by the blockade, ensuring that military forces will not launch further acts of aggression against Iran, and lifting the current maritime blockade. The report specifically noted that these talks will not address Iran's nuclear program itself.
Pakistan and Oman, as the main mediators in the current US-Iran conflict, have been working hard to build bridges of communication between the two sides. However, this process has not been smooth. On Saturday (April 25), Trump abruptly canceled the planned visit of the US special envoy to Islamabad, dashing hopes that peace efforts would be restarted.
Nevertheless, Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi continued to shuttle between the mediating parties. He held in-depth discussions in Oman with Sultan Haitham bin Tariq Said regarding security issues in the Strait of Hormuz.
According to Iranian state media, Araghchi called on Oman to establish a regional security framework free from any external interference, with Gulf states independently maintaining navigation safety in the straits.
Pakistani government sources said that after meeting with Pakistani leaders, Araghchi will travel to Moscow, possibly seeking Russian support. This series of diplomatic moves indicates that Iran is attempting to exert pressure on the United States through multiple channels while simultaneously garnering more international support.
While Trump extended his "telephone invitation," the US military is tightening the noose around Iran with concrete actions. US Defense Secretary Hergsays stated clearly at a press conference last Friday (April 24) that the US maritime blockade against Iran is expanding globally. He cited Trump's previous remarks that the US is "not in a hurry" to reach an agreement with Iran because the US "has plenty of time."
Hegses's rhetoric was very strong; he declared that no ship could sail through the Strait of Hormuz to any place in the world without the permission of the U.S. Navy.
Standing beside Hegses, U.S. General Kane provided further details on the implementation of the blockade. Kane stated that U.S. Central Command was imposing a strict blockade on all Iranian ports. As of Friday morning, the U.S. military had forced 34 ships to turn back. Kane also revealed that the U.S. military would continue to intercept Iranian vessels in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, and that this blockade applied to ships of any nationality, subject to the same interception if they were traveling to or from Iranian ports or territory.
Kane emphasized that the U.S. military is closely monitoring ships heading towards Iran, as well as key targets that were outside the blockade zone when the blockade was issued and are attempting to leave Iran. The U.S. military has completed its deployment and is ready to intercept them.
Hegseth also specifically warned that if Iran were to attempt to lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz, it would constitute a serious violation of the current ceasefire. He acknowledged that the Strait of Hormuz remains open to traffic, but on a much smaller scale than any party would have preferred, and that the risks have significantly increased, primarily due to Iran's irresponsible actions using small, armed speedboats.
The conflict between the US and Iran is not limited to Tehran's nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz. The Trump administration has long sought to limit Iran's support for proxy forces in the region, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The US has also sought to curb Iran's ability to strike US allies with ballistic missiles, particularly the threat posed to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
On the Iranian side, in addition to demanding the lifting of economic sanctions and the naval blockade, they also strongly demanded that Israel cease its military attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon. These intertwined interests make any potential peace agreement exceptionally complex. Trump summarized to reporters in Florida that Iran had put forward many conditions, but they were still insufficient, and the US would continue to maintain patience and military pressure.
Global oil supply remains tight due to the stalemate in US-Iran peace talks and limited tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices continued their upward trend on Monday, with US crude rising more than 2% to $96.68 per barrel in early trading.
In summary, the current US-Iran standoff presents a peculiar "asymmetric stalemate." On the one hand, the US has adopted a willingness to negotiate, opening telephone lines and potential diplomatic channels; on the other hand, it continues to expand its military blockade, strengthen its military deterrence, and clearly states that it is not in a hurry to reach an agreement. Iran, however, insists on the lifting of the blockade and cessation of threats before it will sit down at the negotiating table. Both sides are stuck in a vicious cycle over the question of "who takes the first step." Despite active mediation from countries like Pakistan and Oman, Trump's cancellation of his special envoy's visit has undoubtedly dampened diplomatic efforts.
Whether the situation can change for the better in the future largely depends on whether both sides can find room for compromise on core issues such as nuclear issues, freedom of navigation, and regional influence. As things stand, a peace agreement remains a distant prospect.
Question 1: Why did the United States impose a global maritime blockade on Iran? What is the legal basis for this blockade?
A: According to a public statement by US Defense Secretary Hergsays, the US blockade of Iran is primarily based on two objectives: first, to prevent Iran from transporting oil and weapons through the Strait of Hormuz and other international waters, thereby cutting off its economic lifeline; and second, to force Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program. However, from the perspective of international law, the unilateral global blockade imposed by the US has not been authorized by the UN Security Council. The US claims this is to enforce sanctions against Iran, but Iran considers it an illegal act of aggression. US General Kane stated that the blockade applies to ships of any nationality, and any vessels traveling to or from Iranian ports will be intercepted. To date, at least 34 ships have been ordered to turn back by the US military. Iran considers this blockade a "practical obstacle" and demands that the blockade be lifted before negotiations can begin.
Question 2: Is Iran's demand to lift the blockade before negotiations is reasonable?
A: From Iran's perspective, this position has a logical basis. Iranian President Peshichiyan has clearly stated that Tehran will not participate in "forced negotiations" "under threat or blockade." This means that Iran believes negotiations should be conducted in an atmosphere of equality and voluntariness, and that the US military blockade itself is a form of coercion. If Iran makes concessions under blockade, it will be seen as a humiliation by domestic public opinion. From a negotiation strategy perspective, lifting the blockade first could give Iran more leverage. However, the US believes that the blockade is precisely to force Iran to make concessions, and the Trump administration has repeatedly stated that it is "not in a hurry" to reach an agreement. This difference in the order of priorities is one of the core issues currently hindering the peace agreement stalemate.
Question 3: What roles did Pakistan and Oman play in the US-Iran conflict? Why did the US suddenly cancel its special envoy's visit to Islamabad?
A: Pakistan and Oman are the main third-party mediators in this conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi has frequently traveled between the two countries, attempting to build a platform for direct dialogue between the US and Iran. Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and possesses nuclear weapons, making it a significant power in the region; Oman has long played a neutral mediator role in Gulf affairs and previously facilitated secret negotiations between the US and Iran. However, just before the next round of talks scheduled for Islamabad, Trump abruptly canceled the visit of special envoys Witkov and Kushner. Trump explained that the cancellation was due to excessive travel and expenses involved in the negotiations, and that Iran's proposals were "insufficient." This move was interpreted by the outside world as a signal of escalating US pressure on Iran, and also reflected the US's lack of patience with the mediation process.
Question 4: Why has the Strait of Hormuz become the focal point of the US-Iran standoff? What does the US claim of "no passage without permission" mean?
A: The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's most important oil shipping routes, with approximately 20% of global oil exports passing through it. Iran has long threatened to block the strait as a means of retaliation, while the United States is attempting to control navigation rights in the strait. US Defense Secretary Hergsays declared that "no ship can sail anywhere in the world without the permission of the US Navy," effectively declaring unilateral US control over the strait. The US military is currently intercepting all ships traveling to and from Iran and has stated that Iran would violate the ceasefire if it lays mines. This means that any oil tanker or cargo ship from a third country attempting to enter an Iranian port could be intercepted by US warships. This situation has severely impacted international shipping and energy markets and increased the risk of miscalculation leading to direct military conflict.
Question 5: What are the core differences between the two sides on the nuclear issue? Is it possible to reach a compromise?
A: The core disagreement lies in whether Iran has the right to conduct uranium enrichment activities. Iran insists on its right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, including uranium enrichment, and claims that all nuclear activities are subject to supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Trump administration, however, demands that Iran "abandon its nuclear weapons in a feasible and verifiable manner," effectively demanding a complete halt to uranium enrichment. Trump has explicitly stated that if Iran possesses nuclear weapons, "there is no reason to meet." Iran is currently unwilling to include its nuclear program on the agenda of its current talks with Pakistan. Historically, the 2015 Iran nuclear deal allowed Iran to enrich low-level uranium under strict restrictions, but Trump unilaterally withdrew from the agreement during his first term. Reaching a new compromise now might require the US to recognize some of Iran's enrichment rights while accepting stricter verification. However, judging from Trump's latest statements, he still insists on his bottom line of "never possessing nuclear weapons," while Iran demands the lifting of sanctions first, making a consensus unlikely in the short term.
At 09:17 Beijing time, US crude oil is currently trading at $95.94 per barrel.
https://upload.fx678img.com/upload/ht/20250801/2025080116425973.jpg
Trump's "telephone invitation" – with clear conditions: the nuclear issue is not open to negotiation.
In a Fox News program aired on Sunday (April 26), US President Trump again addressed the Iranian leadership directly. He stated that if Iran wishes to end the current conflict through diplomatic means, it can contact the US, whether through face-to-face talks or telephone communication, and that the US has secure and reliable dedicated lines available for its use.
Trump emphasized that Iran is well aware of the core clause that the agreement must include: Tehran must not possess nuclear weapons. He further warned that if Iran does not abandon its nuclear weapons program, there is no reason for the two sides to meet.
Trump also explained to reporters in Florida why he had abruptly canceled the planned visit of special envoys Witkov and Kushner to Islamabad, Pakistan. He claimed that the visit was canceled because the negotiations involved too much travel and expense, and the initial proposal from Iran was far from sufficient.
However, Trump also admitted that after the diplomatic trip was canceled, Iran "made many demands," but still failed to meet the US's bottom line.
Iran's tough response – lift the blockade first, then discuss other matters.
Iran did not show any eagerness to respond to Trump's "telephone invitation." Iranian President Pezechzian issued a clearly worded government statement during a phone call with Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz.
He emphasized that Tehran would not participate in "imposed negotiations" under any form of threat or naval blockade. Pezechian pointed out that the United States should first remove the substantial obstacles, specifically lifting the military blockade of Iranian ports. Only after the blockade is lifted can negotiators truly lay the foundation for resolving the conflict.
Iran has long insisted that Washington recognize its right to conduct uranium enrichment activities. Tehran officially claims that these activities are entirely for peaceful purposes, primarily for the production of fuel for nuclear power plants, but Western countries generally suspect that Iran's true intention is to develop nuclear weapons.
Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi returned to Islamabad on Sunday after concluding talks with Omani leaders, where he will hold a new round of consultations with Pakistani leaders before heading to Moscow.
According to Iran's semi-official Tasnim News Agency, Araghchi's discussions with Pakistani officials will focus on: establishing a new legal framework for the Strait of Hormuz, demanding compensation from the United States for economic losses caused by the blockade, ensuring that military forces will not launch further acts of aggression against Iran, and lifting the current maritime blockade. The report specifically noted that these talks will not address Iran's nuclear program itself.
The Winding Road of Diplomatic Mediation: Mediating Countries' Efforts in the Cracks
Pakistan and Oman, as the main mediators in the current US-Iran conflict, have been working hard to build bridges of communication between the two sides. However, this process has not been smooth. On Saturday (April 25), Trump abruptly canceled the planned visit of the US special envoy to Islamabad, dashing hopes that peace efforts would be restarted.
Nevertheless, Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi continued to shuttle between the mediating parties. He held in-depth discussions in Oman with Sultan Haitham bin Tariq Said regarding security issues in the Strait of Hormuz.
According to Iranian state media, Araghchi called on Oman to establish a regional security framework free from any external interference, with Gulf states independently maintaining navigation safety in the straits.
Pakistani government sources said that after meeting with Pakistani leaders, Araghchi will travel to Moscow, possibly seeking Russian support. This series of diplomatic moves indicates that Iran is attempting to exert pressure on the United States through multiple channels while simultaneously garnering more international support.
The US global blockade – Defense Secretary declares military force, Navy launches full-scale interception
While Trump extended his "telephone invitation," the US military is tightening the noose around Iran with concrete actions. US Defense Secretary Hergsays stated clearly at a press conference last Friday (April 24) that the US maritime blockade against Iran is expanding globally. He cited Trump's previous remarks that the US is "not in a hurry" to reach an agreement with Iran because the US "has plenty of time."
Hegses's rhetoric was very strong; he declared that no ship could sail through the Strait of Hormuz to any place in the world without the permission of the U.S. Navy.
Standing beside Hegses, U.S. General Kane provided further details on the implementation of the blockade. Kane stated that U.S. Central Command was imposing a strict blockade on all Iranian ports. As of Friday morning, the U.S. military had forced 34 ships to turn back. Kane also revealed that the U.S. military would continue to intercept Iranian vessels in the Pacific and Indian Oceans, and that this blockade applied to ships of any nationality, subject to the same interception if they were traveling to or from Iranian ports or territory.
Kane emphasized that the U.S. military is closely monitoring ships heading towards Iran, as well as key targets that were outside the blockade zone when the blockade was issued and are attempting to leave Iran. The U.S. military has completed its deployment and is ready to intercept them.
Hegseth also specifically warned that if Iran were to attempt to lay mines in the Strait of Hormuz, it would constitute a serious violation of the current ceasefire. He acknowledged that the Strait of Hormuz remains open to traffic, but on a much smaller scale than any party would have preferred, and that the risks have significantly increased, primarily due to Iran's irresponsible actions using small, armed speedboats.
The disagreements extend far beyond the nuclear issue—a complex web of proxy forces, missiles, and sanctions.
The conflict between the US and Iran is not limited to Tehran's nuclear program and control of the Strait of Hormuz. The Trump administration has long sought to limit Iran's support for proxy forces in the region, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and the Houthi rebels in Yemen. The US has also sought to curb Iran's ability to strike US allies with ballistic missiles, particularly the threat posed to Israel and Saudi Arabia.
On the Iranian side, in addition to demanding the lifting of economic sanctions and the naval blockade, they also strongly demanded that Israel cease its military attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon. These intertwined interests make any potential peace agreement exceptionally complex. Trump summarized to reporters in Florida that Iran had put forward many conditions, but they were still insufficient, and the US would continue to maintain patience and military pressure.
The stalemate continues, and the future remains uncertain—both sides are waiting for the other to make the first concession.
Global oil supply remains tight due to the stalemate in US-Iran peace talks and limited tanker traffic in the Strait of Hormuz. Oil prices continued their upward trend on Monday, with US crude rising more than 2% to $96.68 per barrel in early trading.
In summary, the current US-Iran standoff presents a peculiar "asymmetric stalemate." On the one hand, the US has adopted a willingness to negotiate, opening telephone lines and potential diplomatic channels; on the other hand, it continues to expand its military blockade, strengthen its military deterrence, and clearly states that it is not in a hurry to reach an agreement. Iran, however, insists on the lifting of the blockade and cessation of threats before it will sit down at the negotiating table. Both sides are stuck in a vicious cycle over the question of "who takes the first step." Despite active mediation from countries like Pakistan and Oman, Trump's cancellation of his special envoy's visit has undoubtedly dampened diplomatic efforts.
Whether the situation can change for the better in the future largely depends on whether both sides can find room for compromise on core issues such as nuclear issues, freedom of navigation, and regional influence. As things stand, a peace agreement remains a distant prospect.
Frequently Asked Questions
Question 1: Why did the United States impose a global maritime blockade on Iran? What is the legal basis for this blockade?
A: According to a public statement by US Defense Secretary Hergsays, the US blockade of Iran is primarily based on two objectives: first, to prevent Iran from transporting oil and weapons through the Strait of Hormuz and other international waters, thereby cutting off its economic lifeline; and second, to force Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program. However, from the perspective of international law, the unilateral global blockade imposed by the US has not been authorized by the UN Security Council. The US claims this is to enforce sanctions against Iran, but Iran considers it an illegal act of aggression. US General Kane stated that the blockade applies to ships of any nationality, and any vessels traveling to or from Iranian ports will be intercepted. To date, at least 34 ships have been ordered to turn back by the US military. Iran considers this blockade a "practical obstacle" and demands that the blockade be lifted before negotiations can begin.
Question 2: Is Iran's demand to lift the blockade before negotiations is reasonable?
A: From Iran's perspective, this position has a logical basis. Iranian President Peshichiyan has clearly stated that Tehran will not participate in "forced negotiations" "under threat or blockade." This means that Iran believes negotiations should be conducted in an atmosphere of equality and voluntariness, and that the US military blockade itself is a form of coercion. If Iran makes concessions under blockade, it will be seen as a humiliation by domestic public opinion. From a negotiation strategy perspective, lifting the blockade first could give Iran more leverage. However, the US believes that the blockade is precisely to force Iran to make concessions, and the Trump administration has repeatedly stated that it is "not in a hurry" to reach an agreement. This difference in the order of priorities is one of the core issues currently hindering the peace agreement stalemate.
Question 3: What roles did Pakistan and Oman play in the US-Iran conflict? Why did the US suddenly cancel its special envoy's visit to Islamabad?
A: Pakistan and Oman are the main third-party mediators in this conflict. Iranian Foreign Minister Araqchi has frequently traveled between the two countries, attempting to build a platform for direct dialogue between the US and Iran. Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and possesses nuclear weapons, making it a significant power in the region; Oman has long played a neutral mediator role in Gulf affairs and previously facilitated secret negotiations between the US and Iran. However, just before the next round of talks scheduled for Islamabad, Trump abruptly canceled the visit of special envoys Witkov and Kushner. Trump explained that the cancellation was due to excessive travel and expenses involved in the negotiations, and that Iran's proposals were "insufficient." This move was interpreted by the outside world as a signal of escalating US pressure on Iran, and also reflected the US's lack of patience with the mediation process.
Question 4: Why has the Strait of Hormuz become the focal point of the US-Iran standoff? What does the US claim of "no passage without permission" mean?
A: The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world's most important oil shipping routes, with approximately 20% of global oil exports passing through it. Iran has long threatened to block the strait as a means of retaliation, while the United States is attempting to control navigation rights in the strait. US Defense Secretary Hergsays declared that "no ship can sail anywhere in the world without the permission of the US Navy," effectively declaring unilateral US control over the strait. The US military is currently intercepting all ships traveling to and from Iran and has stated that Iran would violate the ceasefire if it lays mines. This means that any oil tanker or cargo ship from a third country attempting to enter an Iranian port could be intercepted by US warships. This situation has severely impacted international shipping and energy markets and increased the risk of miscalculation leading to direct military conflict.
Question 5: What are the core differences between the two sides on the nuclear issue? Is it possible to reach a compromise?
A: The core disagreement lies in whether Iran has the right to conduct uranium enrichment activities. Iran insists on its right to peaceful use of nuclear energy, including uranium enrichment, and claims that all nuclear activities are subject to supervision by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Trump administration, however, demands that Iran "abandon its nuclear weapons in a feasible and verifiable manner," effectively demanding a complete halt to uranium enrichment. Trump has explicitly stated that if Iran possesses nuclear weapons, "there is no reason to meet." Iran is currently unwilling to include its nuclear program on the agenda of its current talks with Pakistan. Historically, the 2015 Iran nuclear deal allowed Iran to enrich low-level uranium under strict restrictions, but Trump unilaterally withdrew from the agreement during his first term. Reaching a new compromise now might require the US to recognize some of Iran's enrichment rights while accepting stricter verification. However, judging from Trump's latest statements, he still insists on his bottom line of "never possessing nuclear weapons," while Iran demands the lifting of sanctions first, making a consensus unlikely in the short term.
At 09:17 Beijing time, US crude oil is currently trading at $95.94 per barrel.
- Risk Warning and Disclaimer
- The market involves risk, and trading may not be suitable for all investors. This article is for reference only and does not constitute personal investment advice, nor does it take into account certain users’ specific investment objectives, financial situation, or other needs. Any investment decisions made based on this information are at your own risk.
