Vans Negotiation Schedule Paused, Iranian Side Maintains "Highest Alert," U.S. Extends Ceasefire Deadline with Iran

【Global Times Special Correspondent in the U.S. Li Yong, Global Times Reporter Xian Yifan, He Tinglan】“Trump's announcement to extend the ceasefire period marks the end of a day filled with uncertainty.” This is how CNN reported on the 21st. On that day, U.S. President Trump first stated in an interview that he did not wish to extend the ceasefire agreement with Iran, and that the U.S. military was ready for combat. Subsequently, Iran officially refused to attend the new round of U.S.-Iran negotiations held in Pakistan. Following this, Trump issued a statement on social media, announcing the extension of the U.S.-Iran ceasefire deadline, which was originally set to expire at “10 PM Washington time on the 22nd,” until Iran submits its proposal and completes relevant consultations. The BBC commented that “the conflict in the Middle East has once again taken an unexpected turn,” as Washington decided to give itself more time to deal with the Iran issue.

On the 22nd, Iran's Tasnim News Agency reported that multiple sources confirmed that Iran did not request an extension of its ceasefire with the U.S. Iran has continued to send strong signals. According to the Iranian news agency on the 22nd, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps stated that it remains in a state of maximum alert. Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei stated on the 21st that the contradictory information and actions from the U.S. side, as well as unacceptable moves, were the reasons why Iran did not decide to participate in the second round of negotiations. The Singapore-based Lianhe Zaobao stated that for Tehran, the lifting of the maritime blockade by Washington is a key prerequisite for restarting the second round of negotiations. Reports indicate that the arrangements for passage through the Strait of Hormuz and nuclear issues remain two major gaps that are difficult for the U.S. and Iran to bridge in the short term.

“The U.S. government took a deep breath and stepped back”

On the 21st, Trump claimed that the Iranian government is “seriously divided internally,” and at the request of Pakistani leaders, “we were asked to postpone the attack on Iran until its leaders and representatives can present a unified proposal.” He also stated that he had instructed the U.S. military to continue maintaining the maritime blockade of Iranian ports and to remain in a state of readiness.

“The U.S. government took a deep breath and stepped back.” The BBC commented that Trump decided to give himself more time to address the Iran issue. An article in Lianhe Zaobao on the 22nd also suggested that this “active restraint” from the U.S. seems more like Washington trying to create room for maneuver in the face of an “empty chair.” The Singapore Asian News Channel quoted U.S. foreign policy expert Slavin as saying, “Some believe that the U.S. (maritime) blockade against Iran will ultimately force the Iranians back to the negotiating table, but I am not so sure.”

According to reports from the BBC and the U.S. New York Times, Trump's statement on that day was in stark contrast to his earlier remarks. He had previously told CNBC that if Iran did not accept the U.S. demands, “I expect to bomb,” and the military “is ready for combat.” Trump also stated on the 20th that Vice President Pence would travel to Pakistan, and the new round of negotiations was scheduled to begin on the 21st. However, according to a report from Iran's Tasnim News Agency on the evening of the 21st, Iran officially refused to attend the second round of U.S.-Iran talks. Iran believes that the U.S. is obstructing the achievement of any substantive agreement, and participating in negotiations is merely a waste of time. The Iranian news agency commented on the 22nd that the White House's deal-oriented negotiation framework and attempts to bargain over content that is fundamentally non-negotiable in the logic of sovereign states globally are fundamental obstacles to any diplomatic negotiations between the U.S. and Iran. In recent years, there has been fundamental skepticism about the principles guiding the White House's actions.

The U.S. Wall Street Journal disclosed that White House officials were initially optimistic that Pence could achieve some written results with Iran in Islamabad. Sources revealed that “Air Force Two” spent most of the day on the 21st at Andrews Joint Base near Washington, waiting for Pence's arrival. On that day, the White House held a series of meetings where Trump, Pence, presidential envoy Hook, Trump's son-in-law Kushner, and several senior U.S. security officials weighed various options. By the afternoon, Pence's schedule was suspended. Ultimately, Trump and his team adopted a compromise solution: to continue to pressure Iran until it presents a specific proposal to the U.S., after which the U.S. could reassess whether to continue negotiations or launch a new round of strikes.

According to the Iranian news agency on the 22nd, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps emphasized the necessity of remaining vigilant during the “military confrontation silence period” and stated that Iran's armed forces are prepared to respond decisively, lethally, and immediately to any new invasion. According to Iranian media reports, on the evening of April 21, Iranian missiles such as the “Qader” and “Khoramshahr-4” were showcased in Tehran's square to demonstrate to enemies that “Iran's missile capabilities are fully prepared.”

A more realistic path?

Regarding the U.S. announcement to extend the ceasefire, foreign media provided various interpretations. CNN's article on the 22nd analyzed that Trump did not specify the duration of the ceasefire extension, indicating his unwillingness to reignite conflict and his hope to resolve this “unpopular” war through diplomatic means. However, the failure of this round of negotiations highlights the difficulty for the U.S. to reach an agreement that satisfies its numerous demands. The Singapore Asian News Channel quoted observers' views, stating that the U.S.'s latest statement reflects its cautious attitude towards resuming military action. From repeatedly setting and overturning deadlines to shifting to an “indefinite ceasefire,” the U.S.'s latest actions may provide a more realistic path to ease tensions. However, if negotiations do not have a clear direction for progress, the risk of escalation remains very high.

Experts interviewed by Lianhe Zaobao believe that Washington has fallen into a passive position in the absence of a clear strategic endpoint, and Tehran has, to some extent, mastered the rhythm of the negotiations. The Asian News Channel reported that regarding the claim of the Iranian government being in “serious division,” U.S. foreign policy expert Slavin holds a different view. She believes that although there may be different tendencies within the Iranian leadership, they are united in their opposition to the U.S. and in ensuring that any agreement is favorable to Iran.

U.S. Washington Post columnist Ignatius stated that both the U.S. and Iran intend to reach an agreement through negotiations, but they are taking a hardline stance and refusing to yield, sending signals that “they are not in a hurry to negotiate, while the other side is more urgent.” This is a pressure strategy aimed at gaining the initiative in negotiations, but this “extreme tug-of-war” could also provoke a new round of conflict. The BBC believes that the conflict between the U.S. and Iran is in a “dangerous stalemate,” with both sides distrustful of each other. The article states that the longer this standoff lasts, the more severe the impact on the global economy, and the greater the risk of a full-scale war breaking out in the Gulf region.

Iran: Two ships seized

The U.S. New York Post reported exclusively on the 22nd that Trump stated that “good news” regarding the second round of U.S.-Iran negotiations may come as early as this Friday. However, the New York Times stated that even if the two countries return to the negotiating table, issues such as Iran's nuclear program and navigation through the Strait of Hormuz remain key sticking points.

Lianhe Zaobao stated that whether the Strait of Hormuz can be unblocked is a key variable determining the direction of the situation. Scholars from Singapore's Nanyang Technological University, Rajaratnam School of International Studies, predict that if U.S. military blockade actions significantly compress Iran's economic space, the situation may shift back to military confrontation; if the blockade fails to force Iran to make concessions, both sides may fall into a low-intensity stalemate. Reports indicate that Iran's permanent representative to the United Nations, Iravani, stated that as long as Washington ends the maritime blockade, the next round of negotiations can be held in Islamabad. This indicates that for Tehran, lifting the blockade is a key prerequisite for restarting the second round of negotiations. Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif stated on the 21st that “the blockade of Iranian ports is an act of war and violates the ceasefire agreement.” 

On the 22nd, new developments in the situation in the Strait of Hormuz attracted widespread international attention. According to Iranian media reports on the 22nd, the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps Navy stated that it had seized two ships attempting to pass through the Strait of Hormuz without authorization, one of which is associated with Israel, while the other was deemed a threat to maritime safety for not holding the necessary permits. Iran once again emphasized that disrupting the order and security of the Strait of Hormuz is “our red line.” NBC reported that Iran conveyed a message to the U.S. through this action. The U.S. military intercepted and took control of an Iranian cargo ship in the Gulf of Oman on the 19th, and the next day boarded and inspected a so-called “Iran-related” tanker in the Indian Ocean. The New York Times stated that the situation in the Strait of Hormuz is “escalating.”