Iran stays in peace talks despite US strikes, as nuclear deal nears critical juncture

Four Iranian soldiers killed in US strikes; 31 Lebanese civilians killed and 40 wounded in recent Israeli strikes.
The talks had reached a moment where one wrong move could collapse everything.
Iran remained at the negotiating table despite US strikes, signaling that both sides understood the fragility of their peace process.

In the shadow of fresh bloodshed, Iran and the United States remained at the negotiating table in Doha this week, even as American strikes killed four Iranian soldiers and Tehran condemned the bombings as a betrayal of the ceasefire. The restraint on both sides reflects not trust, but the weight of what collapse would cost — a war already reshaping the Middle East, markets already trembling, and a fragile window of sixty days in which two adversaries must decide whether history bends toward agreement or catastrophe. At the center of it all sits a single unresolved question: twelve billion dollars in frozen assets, and whether either side can afford to move first.

  • US airstrikes killed four Iranian soldiers and targeted missile and mine-laying operations in the Strait of Hormuz, threatening to unravel ceasefire negotiations at their most delicate stage.
  • Iran condemned the strikes as a violation of good faith, yet its chief negotiator stayed in Doha for a second consecutive day — a deliberate signal that Tehran is not ready to let the talks die.
  • The entire framework is bottlenecked on $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets, with an Iranian parliamentarian warning that a transfer plan through Qatar and Russia was blocked by Washington at the last moment.
  • Hardliners on all sides — in Washington, Tehran, and Jerusalem — are pressing their negotiators not to yield, while Israel's expanding strikes in southern Lebanon killed 31 civilians and wounded 40, straining the ceasefire's viability.
  • Iran's new supreme leader projected defiance, predicting Israel's elimination by 2040, while Trump recycled maximalist rhetoric online — leaving the gap between the two sides' visions of the region as wide as ever.

On Tuesday, Iran's foreign ministry sharply condemned American airstrikes that had targeted missile installations and mine-laying operations in the Strait of Hormuz, killing four Iranian soldiers. Tehran called the strikes a ceasefire violation and an act of bad faith. Yet Iran's chief negotiator, parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, remained in Doha for a second consecutive day — a deliberate act of restraint that signaled Tehran understood how much was at stake. One wrong move, and everything could collapse.

The talks, mediated by Pakistan and Qatar, aim to produce a historic agreement between two countries that have been at war since late February. The immediate framework involves a sixty-day window to negotiate new constraints on Iran's nuclear program, alongside sanctions relief on oil and petrochemical exports and the unfreezing of more than twelve billion dollars in Iranian assets. Oil futures climbed four percent on news of the renewed fighting — markets registering the fragility of the moment.

The frozen assets have become the singular obstacle. Neither side will advance on other issues — the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear program — without seeing the money move first. One Iranian parliamentarian claimed a transfer plan routed through Qatar and Russia had been blocked by Washington at the last moment, and issued a pointed warning about knowing where American negotiators Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff were staying in Doha and Dubai.

In Washington, Trump postponed a Camp David cabinet meeting and continued posting maximalist visions of Iranian surrender on Truth Social. Hardliners in all three capitals — Washington, Tehran, and Jerusalem — were pushing their negotiators to hold firm. Meanwhile, Israel was expanding operations in southern Lebanon, striking north of the ceasefire line and issuing evacuation warnings for nineteen villages. By Tuesday evening, Lebanese health authorities reported thirty-one people killed and forty wounded in Israeli strikes.

Iran's new supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei — who came to power after his father was killed in the war's opening strikes — issued a statement projecting confidence, predicting the elimination of Israel by 2040 and the eventual expulsion of American forces from the region. His vision stood in stark contrast to Trump's imagined future of regional normalization. Between those two poles, negotiators in Doha were trying to find enough common ground to end a war that has already remade the Middle East.

On Tuesday, the Iranian foreign ministry issued a sharp rebuke of American bombing runs that had targeted missile installations and mine-laying operations in the Strait of Hormuz. The strikes had killed four Iranian soldiers. Tehran called the action a violation of the ceasefire and an expression of bad faith. Yet the Iranians did not walk away from the negotiating table in Doha, where Pakistan and Qatar were mediating what could become a historic agreement between two countries that had been at war since late February.

The restraint was deliberate. Iran's military made no announcement of immediate retaliation, a signal that the leadership in Tehran understood something crucial: the talks had reached a moment where one wrong move could collapse everything. The Iranian parliamentary speaker and chief negotiator, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, remained in Doha for a second consecutive day, working through the mechanics of how to unlock more than twelve billion dollars in frozen Iranian assets and secure sanctions relief on oil and petrochemical exports during a sixty-day window meant for negotiating new constraints on Iran's nuclear program. Oil futures climbed four percent on news of the renewed fighting, a reminder that markets were watching the fragility of the moment.

The core dispute had narrowed to a single issue: the frozen assets. Both sides had accumulated enough mistrust that neither would move forward on other matters—the future of the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear program itself—without first seeing the money transferred. One Iranian parliamentarian, Ahmad Bakhshayesh Ardestani, claimed that a plan to move twelve billion dollars through Qatar and then Russia to Iran had been blocked by the United States at the last moment. He issued a warning with an edge of menace: if the war restarted, Iran knew where Trump's lead negotiators, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, were staying in Doha and Dubai.

In Washington, Donald Trump had planned a rare cabinet meeting at Camp David but postponed it, citing bad weather. He continued to face questions about whether any peace agreement could satisfy the objectives he had set when the war began. On Truth Social, he recycled a rambling post from the previous week, imagining a scenario in which Iran surrendered completely—navy destroyed, air force gone, military disarmed—and still Democrats and the media would claim Tehran had won. The post captured something real about the political pressure all sides were under. Hardliners in Washington, Tehran, and Jerusalem were all pushing their negotiators not to give ground. Mahmoud Nabavian, a member of Iran's parliamentary security commission, insisted that any agreement must preserve Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz. But Ghalibaf, freshly reelected as speaker by an overwhelming margin, had room to maneuver past this opposition, at least for now.

Meanwhile, the agreement itself was supposed to end the war but not define the peace. A separate thirty-day window had been carved out for the United States to lift its blockade of Iranian oil ports and for Iran to allow commercial shipping through the Strait to resume at pre-war levels. Yet even as negotiators worked toward this framework, the fighting was not winding down. Israel was expanding operations into southern Lebanon, striking north of the yellow line to target Hezbollah's missile positions. On Tuesday evening, the Israeli military issued evacuation warnings for nineteen villages in southern Lebanon. Hours later, the Lebanese health ministry reported that Israeli strikes had killed thirty-one people and wounded forty.

Iran's supreme leader, Mojtaba Khamenei, who had assumed power after his father was killed in the opening strikes of the war, issued a statement marking the start of the hajj. He projected confidence, claiming the tide of history was moving in Iran's favor and predicting the elimination of Israel by 2040. He had not been seen in public or released any recorded audio since his elevation in March. His words were a counterpoint to Trump's vision of normalized relations between Arab states, Turkey, and Iran with Israel. Khamenei spoke instead of American bases being driven from the region and of Israel approaching its final stages. The gap between these two visions—one of regional integration, the other of existential struggle—hung over the negotiations in Doha as the two sides tried to find a way to end a war that had already reshaped the Middle East.

Iran's foreign ministry called the US attack an act of bad faith and a definitive violation of the ceasefire, but did not pull out of talks.
— Iranian foreign ministry
Khamenei claimed the tide of history was moving in Iran's favor and that American bases would no longer be safe havens in the region.
— Iran's supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Inventor

Why would Iran stay in talks after being bombed? Doesn't that signal weakness?

Model

It signals something more complicated. They're not staying because they're weak—they're staying because they believe they're close to something they can claim as victory. Twelve billion dollars in frozen assets, sanctions relief, a formal ceasefire. That's real leverage.

Inventor

But the US just attacked them. How do you negotiate with someone who just attacked you?

Model

You do it because the alternative is worse. If Iran walks out, the war continues, more soldiers die, the economy stays crushed. The military didn't announce reprisals, which tells you the leadership made a calculation: this moment is too important to throw away.

Inventor

What's the actual sticking point? It seems like they should be able to agree on something by now.

Model

The money. Twelve billion dollars in frozen assets. Neither side trusts the other enough to move on nuclear issues or the Strait of Hormuz until that transfer actually happens. It's become the test of good faith.

Inventor

And the fighting in Lebanon? How does that fit in?

Model

It doesn't fit. That's the danger. Israel is escalating while everyone's supposed to be winding down. If Lebanon becomes a full war again, the whole agreement could collapse. Iran's trying to strengthen the ceasefire language for Lebanon, but Israel isn't listening.

Inventor

So this could fall apart at any moment?

Model

Yes. One side miscalculates, one hardliner pushes too far, one attack goes too far, and the whole thing unravels. That's why everyone's being so careful—and why the US bombing was so risky.

Quer a matéria completa? Leia o original em The Guardian ↗
Fale Conosco FAQ