US military launches new airstrikes overnight; US-Iran negotiations stalled? Rubio admits agreement still needs several days.
2026-05-26 15:11:58
The US-Iran negotiations, which have garnered significant international attention, have recently encountered another setback. Although the two sides have maintained a fragile ceasefire since early April, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio publicly stated on Tuesday (May 26) that reaching a final agreement with Iran could still take several days. Meanwhile, the US military launched a new round of airstrikes on Monday (early Tuesday morning Beijing time), further complicating the already complex situation in the Middle East. This article will comprehensively analyze the background and development of the current events, starting with the latest US statements, details of the military operations, Iran's response, and key disagreements such as the nuclear issue and the passage through the Strait of Hormuz.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters aboard his plane bound for Jaipur, India, that while "quite solid content" had been reached at the negotiating table, it would still take several days to finalize an agreement. He emphasized that the United States had given every opportunity for diplomatic means to succeed, but at the same time, the U.S. would not rule out the possibility of handling relations with Iran in "other ways" in the future.
Of particular note is Rubio's strongly worded statement regarding the passage through the Strait of Hormuz. He stated that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open "under any circumstances," adding, "The strait must be open, it must be open no matter what, and it must remain open." This statement is seen as a direct warning from the United States to Iran's actions in the strait and also hints at the US's uncompromising stance on its core interests.
Just before Rubio made the above remarks, U.S. Central Command announced on Monday evening local time that it had launched a new round of airstrikes against targets in southern Iran. The U.S. characterized the operation as a "defensive strike," claiming its purpose was to protect U.S. forces from direct threats posed by Iranian forces. The targets reportedly included vessels attempting to lay mines in the relevant waters and some missile launch sites.
Meanwhile, Iranian media, citing military sources, reported that Iran had successfully shot down a "hostile" stealth drone using a new air defense system. However, Iran did not explicitly identify the drone's owner. This incident further escalated the military standoff between the two sides. According to informed officials, while the US launched its attack, Iran's chief negotiator and foreign minister were meeting with the Qatari prime minister in Doha to discuss a possible agreement with the US to end the three-month-long war. This "fighting while negotiating" situation highlights the extreme complexity of US-Iran relations.
The US-Iran negotiations are currently focused on two main issues: Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and nuclear program, and the rules for passage and management of the Strait of Hormuz.
On the nuclear issue, US President Trump previously posted on social media that negotiations with Iran were progressing "well." He proposed a concrete plan whereby Iran's enriched uranium could be "destroyed on-site" or at "another acceptable location." Trump clearly stated that his primary goal in this conflict was to prevent Iran from using its highly enriched uranium to develop nuclear weapons, a claim Tehran has consistently denied. However, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bagaei previously stated that Iran would only engage in substantive negotiations on the nuclear issue if a framework agreement was first reached, indicating that the two sides still have disagreements regarding the order of negotiations.
Regarding the Strait of Hormuz, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson revealed that the current potential agreement does not include specific details on the strait's management. According to the protocol soon to be agreed upon between Iran and Oman, Iran will not charge passage fees for passing vessels, but will charge fees for navigation services, navigation safety guarantees, and environmental protection measures. Separately, Japan's Nikkei Shimbun, citing a Middle Eastern diplomatic source, reported that the US and Iran are discussing a plan to formally open the Strait of Hormuz approximately thirty days after reaching an agreement to end hostilities.
Beyond the direct confrontation between the US and Iran, tensions in the region have been further escalated by Israel's actions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated on Monday that Israel would intensify its crackdown on Hezbollah in Lebanon. Subsequently, the Israeli military confirmed that it was launching attacks on Hezbollah infrastructure in the Bekaa Valley and other areas in eastern Lebanon. This series of actions has made the Middle East situation, which was already focused on the US-Iran rivalry, even more complex, with various forces checking and balancing each other, increasing the risk of the conflict spilling over.
In summary, although both the US and Iran have expressed a willingness to resolve the dispute through diplomatic channels, Rubio's statement that "it will still take several days" and the fact of a new round of US airstrikes suggest that the possibility of reaching a comprehensive agreement in the short term is not optimistic. The Strait of Hormuz, as a vital waterway for approximately one-fifth of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas transport, directly impacts the international energy market. The previous standoff had already caused oil prices to surge and pushed up the prices of commodities such as fuel, fertilizers, and food.
In early Asian trading on May 26, West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures prices rebounded slightly by nearly 2%, currently trading around $92.35 per barrel, but are still down nearly 5% from Friday's closing price, indicating the market's sensitive reaction to the progress of negotiations.
In the coming days, the progress of the Doha talks and whether the US and Iran can reach a preliminary consensus on the nuclear issue and the management of the Strait of Hormuz will be key to determining the direction of the situation.
Question 1: Are the US and Iran currently in a ceasefire or at war? Why is the US military still launching airstrikes during the ceasefire?
A: According to the tacit understanding reached between the two sides in early April, there is indeed a "ceasefire" between the US and Iran, but this ceasefire is very fragile and has not formed a formal ceasefire agreement. The new round of US airstrikes was characterized by the US as a "defensive strike," justified by the need to protect US forces from "direct threats" from Iranian forces. In other words, the US believes that certain actions by Iran (such as attempts to lay mines) constitute de facto hostile acts, and therefore the US strikes are seen as a response to threats rather than an active violation of the ceasefire. Such "limited military action within a ceasefire" is not uncommon in contemporary conflicts, reflecting a lack of basic mutual trust between the two sides.
Question 2: Why is the Strait of Hormuz so important? What exactly does the United States mean by "keeping it open in some way"?
A: The Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean and is one of the world's most critical oil shipping routes, handling approximately one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas transport. Any blockade or disruption of the strait would immediately drive up international oil prices and impact the global economy. The US statement about "keeping it open in some way" is a diplomatic ambiguity, implying that if diplomatic negotiations fail, the US does not rule out using military force to forcibly clear mines, escort ships, or even strike Iranian coastal facilities to ensure the waterway is not blocked. This statement serves both to pressure Iran and to reserve room for possible subsequent military action.
Question 3: What is Iran's true stance on the nuclear issue? Is it possible that the US demand for the "destruction of enriched uranium" will be accepted?
A: Iran has long denied having any plans to develop nuclear weapons, insisting that its nuclear activities are entirely for civilian purposes, such as power generation and medical research. However, it is an undeniable fact that Iran possesses a stockpile of highly enriched uranium. The US demand for "on-site destruction" or destruction of this enriched uranium at a third-party location is essentially an attempt to deprive Iran of its ability to quickly develop nuclear weapons. From Iran's perspective, enriched uranium is a crucial bargaining chip; easily destroying it would mean abandoning its greatest strategic deterrent. Therefore, Iran is more likely to accept the safekeeping of the enriched uranium in a third country (such as Russia) or to accept extremely strict international inspections and restrictions, rather than direct destruction. Currently, the two sides are still negotiating around this core difference.
Question 4: What substantive progress was made in the Doha talks? What specific clauses were the main sticking points in the negotiations?
A: According to informed officials, the Doha talks mainly discussed three specific areas: the management arrangements for the Strait of Hormuz, the handling of Iran's highly enriched uranium, and the unfreezing of Iranian funds frozen overseas. The issue of unfreezing funds is currently relatively close to reaching a consensus, but the sticking points are the right of way through the strait and the nuclear issue. Iran insists that the management of the strait should be negotiated bilaterally between Iran and Oman, and that the United States should not intervene; while the United States demands a clear international guarantee mechanism for passage. On the nuclear issue, the two sides disagree on the order of negotiations—the US wants to discuss nuclear restrictions before lifting sanctions, while Iran demands that the framework for lifting sanctions be confirmed first. Furthermore, the specific timetable for opening the strait (such as opening it 30 days after an agreement is reached) is still under discussion and has not yet been finalized.
Question 5: What impact will the US-Iran conflict have on the daily lives of ordinary consumers?
A: The most direct impact will be on energy prices. If the Strait of Hormuz is blocked, international oil prices will rise sharply, subsequently pushing up the prices of refined petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel. Since oil is a fundamental raw material for many industrial products such as fertilizers, plastics, and synthetic fibers, rising oil prices will be passed on to food packaging, clothing, daily necessities, and even fertilizer prices, ultimately leading to increased global inflationary pressure. Historically, similar geopolitical conflicts have resulted in fuel shortages and rising food prices in many countries and regions. For ordinary consumers, this means more expensive gasoline, more expensive groceries, and potentially higher shipping costs for online shopping. Furthermore, increased volatility in financial markets could put those holding stocks or funds at risk of asset devaluation.
At 15:10 Beijing time, US crude oil is currently trading at $92.36 per barrel.
I. Rubio's latest statement: The diplomatic window is not closed, but "other methods" are also being considered.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio told reporters aboard his plane bound for Jaipur, India, that while "quite solid content" had been reached at the negotiating table, it would still take several days to finalize an agreement. He emphasized that the United States had given every opportunity for diplomatic means to succeed, but at the same time, the U.S. would not rule out the possibility of handling relations with Iran in "other ways" in the future.
Of particular note is Rubio's strongly worded statement regarding the passage through the Strait of Hormuz. He stated that the Strait of Hormuz must remain open "under any circumstances," adding, "The strait must be open, it must be open no matter what, and it must remain open." This statement is seen as a direct warning from the United States to Iran's actions in the strait and also hints at the US's uncompromising stance on its core interests.
II. Military Operations Resume: US Launches "Defensive Strike," Iran Claims to Have Shot Down Stealth Drone
Just before Rubio made the above remarks, U.S. Central Command announced on Monday evening local time that it had launched a new round of airstrikes against targets in southern Iran. The U.S. characterized the operation as a "defensive strike," claiming its purpose was to protect U.S. forces from direct threats posed by Iranian forces. The targets reportedly included vessels attempting to lay mines in the relevant waters and some missile launch sites.
Meanwhile, Iranian media, citing military sources, reported that Iran had successfully shot down a "hostile" stealth drone using a new air defense system. However, Iran did not explicitly identify the drone's owner. This incident further escalated the military standoff between the two sides. According to informed officials, while the US launched its attack, Iran's chief negotiator and foreign minister were meeting with the Qatari prime minister in Doha to discuss a possible agreement with the US to end the three-month-long war. This "fighting while negotiating" situation highlights the extreme complexity of US-Iran relations.
III. Nuclear Issues and Strait Management: Two Core Focuses at the Negotiation Table
The US-Iran negotiations are currently focused on two main issues: Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and nuclear program, and the rules for passage and management of the Strait of Hormuz.
On the nuclear issue, US President Trump previously posted on social media that negotiations with Iran were progressing "well." He proposed a concrete plan whereby Iran's enriched uranium could be "destroyed on-site" or at "another acceptable location." Trump clearly stated that his primary goal in this conflict was to prevent Iran from using its highly enriched uranium to develop nuclear weapons, a claim Tehran has consistently denied. However, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bagaei previously stated that Iran would only engage in substantive negotiations on the nuclear issue if a framework agreement was first reached, indicating that the two sides still have disagreements regarding the order of negotiations.
Regarding the Strait of Hormuz, an Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson revealed that the current potential agreement does not include specific details on the strait's management. According to the protocol soon to be agreed upon between Iran and Oman, Iran will not charge passage fees for passing vessels, but will charge fees for navigation services, navigation safety guarantees, and environmental protection measures. Separately, Japan's Nikkei Shimbun, citing a Middle Eastern diplomatic source, reported that the US and Iran are discussing a plan to formally open the Strait of Hormuz approximately thirty days after reaching an agreement to end hostilities.
IV. The Involvement of the Israeli Factor and the Escalation of Regional Tensions
Beyond the direct confrontation between the US and Iran, tensions in the region have been further escalated by Israel's actions. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated on Monday that Israel would intensify its crackdown on Hezbollah in Lebanon. Subsequently, the Israeli military confirmed that it was launching attacks on Hezbollah infrastructure in the Bekaa Valley and other areas in eastern Lebanon. This series of actions has made the Middle East situation, which was already focused on the US-Iran rivalry, even more complex, with various forces checking and balancing each other, increasing the risk of the conflict spilling over.
V. Summary: Short-term agreement stalled, oil prices and global markets under pressure.
In summary, although both the US and Iran have expressed a willingness to resolve the dispute through diplomatic channels, Rubio's statement that "it will still take several days" and the fact of a new round of US airstrikes suggest that the possibility of reaching a comprehensive agreement in the short term is not optimistic. The Strait of Hormuz, as a vital waterway for approximately one-fifth of the world's oil and liquefied natural gas transport, directly impacts the international energy market. The previous standoff had already caused oil prices to surge and pushed up the prices of commodities such as fuel, fertilizers, and food.
In early Asian trading on May 26, West Texas Intermediate crude oil futures prices rebounded slightly by nearly 2%, currently trading around $92.35 per barrel, but are still down nearly 5% from Friday's closing price, indicating the market's sensitive reaction to the progress of negotiations.
In the coming days, the progress of the Doha talks and whether the US and Iran can reach a preliminary consensus on the nuclear issue and the management of the Strait of Hormuz will be key to determining the direction of the situation.
Frequently Asked Questions
Question 1: Are the US and Iran currently in a ceasefire or at war? Why is the US military still launching airstrikes during the ceasefire?
A: According to the tacit understanding reached between the two sides in early April, there is indeed a "ceasefire" between the US and Iran, but this ceasefire is very fragile and has not formed a formal ceasefire agreement. The new round of US airstrikes was characterized by the US as a "defensive strike," justified by the need to protect US forces from "direct threats" from Iranian forces. In other words, the US believes that certain actions by Iran (such as attempts to lay mines) constitute de facto hostile acts, and therefore the US strikes are seen as a response to threats rather than an active violation of the ceasefire. Such "limited military action within a ceasefire" is not uncommon in contemporary conflicts, reflecting a lack of basic mutual trust between the two sides.
Question 2: Why is the Strait of Hormuz so important? What exactly does the United States mean by "keeping it open in some way"?
A: The Strait of Hormuz connects the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean and is one of the world's most critical oil shipping routes, handling approximately one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas transport. Any blockade or disruption of the strait would immediately drive up international oil prices and impact the global economy. The US statement about "keeping it open in some way" is a diplomatic ambiguity, implying that if diplomatic negotiations fail, the US does not rule out using military force to forcibly clear mines, escort ships, or even strike Iranian coastal facilities to ensure the waterway is not blocked. This statement serves both to pressure Iran and to reserve room for possible subsequent military action.
Question 3: What is Iran's true stance on the nuclear issue? Is it possible that the US demand for the "destruction of enriched uranium" will be accepted?
A: Iran has long denied having any plans to develop nuclear weapons, insisting that its nuclear activities are entirely for civilian purposes, such as power generation and medical research. However, it is an undeniable fact that Iran possesses a stockpile of highly enriched uranium. The US demand for "on-site destruction" or destruction of this enriched uranium at a third-party location is essentially an attempt to deprive Iran of its ability to quickly develop nuclear weapons. From Iran's perspective, enriched uranium is a crucial bargaining chip; easily destroying it would mean abandoning its greatest strategic deterrent. Therefore, Iran is more likely to accept the safekeeping of the enriched uranium in a third country (such as Russia) or to accept extremely strict international inspections and restrictions, rather than direct destruction. Currently, the two sides are still negotiating around this core difference.
Question 4: What substantive progress was made in the Doha talks? What specific clauses were the main sticking points in the negotiations?
A: According to informed officials, the Doha talks mainly discussed three specific areas: the management arrangements for the Strait of Hormuz, the handling of Iran's highly enriched uranium, and the unfreezing of Iranian funds frozen overseas. The issue of unfreezing funds is currently relatively close to reaching a consensus, but the sticking points are the right of way through the strait and the nuclear issue. Iran insists that the management of the strait should be negotiated bilaterally between Iran and Oman, and that the United States should not intervene; while the United States demands a clear international guarantee mechanism for passage. On the nuclear issue, the two sides disagree on the order of negotiations—the US wants to discuss nuclear restrictions before lifting sanctions, while Iran demands that the framework for lifting sanctions be confirmed first. Furthermore, the specific timetable for opening the strait (such as opening it 30 days after an agreement is reached) is still under discussion and has not yet been finalized.
Question 5: What impact will the US-Iran conflict have on the daily lives of ordinary consumers?
A: The most direct impact will be on energy prices. If the Strait of Hormuz is blocked, international oil prices will rise sharply, subsequently pushing up the prices of refined petroleum products such as gasoline, diesel, and aviation fuel. Since oil is a fundamental raw material for many industrial products such as fertilizers, plastics, and synthetic fibers, rising oil prices will be passed on to food packaging, clothing, daily necessities, and even fertilizer prices, ultimately leading to increased global inflationary pressure. Historically, similar geopolitical conflicts have resulted in fuel shortages and rising food prices in many countries and regions. For ordinary consumers, this means more expensive gasoline, more expensive groceries, and potentially higher shipping costs for online shopping. Furthermore, increased volatility in financial markets could put those holding stocks or funds at risk of asset devaluation.
At 15:10 Beijing time, US crude oil is currently trading at $92.36 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.
