US President Donald Trump has been humiliated in Iran and is now beginning to realize it. He appears irritated by the way the Iranians are handling negotiations, and is reportedly seriously considering the possibility of restarting large-scale military operations. The stalemate in which he finds himself is unprecedented. There is no doubt that Trump does not want to order a new, more extensive war, as such a development could spiral completely out of his control and prove truly dangerous for the American, and global, economy.
However, the messages Tehran is sending regarding the talks do not satisfy him. This is likely because he expected an easy and comfortable victory, an unconditional surrender that never came. Iran maintains that it will never back down, that it will not retreat, and that it will go to the very end; after all, this war is existential for the Iranian regime. The calculations and strategy of the American president have proven, at least until today, entirely incorrect.
Already, the Democrats are preparing to bring the War Powers Resolution to Congress for a seventh vote to withdraw US troops from hostilities with Iran. But that is not all. The US president is emitting signs of weakness at a time when he is preparing for a historic visit (May 13 to 15) to China. Characteristically, while claiming the ceasefire has only a 1% chance of holding, he mentioned that he continues to bet on a diplomatic solution and that the Iranians will buckle. It would not be the first time the American president has been proven wrong in the Persian Gulf.
Consecutive refutations
Perhaps the strangest moment in the months-long war with Iran occurred in mid-April, when President Donald Trump insisted that Tehran had just "agreed to everything" he had demanded. Of course, this was never confirmed. And there is no reason to believe such agreements existed—even temporarily—anywhere other than in Trump's mind, CNN reports. Almost everything else still indicates, even weeks later, that the two sides remain far from a deal. Trump behaved as if he could will a deal into existence simply because he wanted it. Instead, he made it absolutely clear to everyone, including Iran, that he was desperate for a deal. And it was neither the first nor the last time.
Hesitant for war
Time and again, Trump has appeared remarkably hesitant in recent weeks to resume hostilities if Iran did not give him what he wanted. He and his administration reached a point where they struggled to explain why they continued to give Tehran time and space. While this approach may occasionally calm the markets, Iranian leaders seem to interpret it as a sign that they can simply wait out an American president who does not want to return to a full-scale war. Returning to open military conflict, after all, carries the risk of prolonged economic pressure due to high fuel prices, endangering American lives, and further depleting already reduced US weapon stockpiles.
The ceasefire is dead
None of this means that Trump will not eventually strike Iran again. On Monday, he stated from the Oval Office that the one-month ceasefire was "on life support to a massive degree." He may eventually decide that Tehran is mocking him and that such attacks are necessary. However, it is clear that he has shown remarkable tolerance.
The threats
The most frequent indication of this dynamic is the repeated deadlines Trump set for Iran to agree to a deal "or there will be consequences," followed by his retreat even when Tehran did not agree. This happened at least five times in one month, between March 21 and April 21. Most of the time, Trump claimed the deadline extensions were because a deal was close. However, the fifth time, he didn't even bother to claim that—and explicitly stated there was no deadline at all.
The agony
Even the beginning of the ceasefire announced on April 7 revealed an agonizing effort by Trump to stop military strikes. The two sides could not even agree on basic elements of the ceasefire, such as whether it included Israeli attacks in Lebanon. But when Iran threatened to walk away, Trump and his administration scrambled to resolve some of these issues. Everything suggested the deal had been concluded hastily and sloppily to avoid the realization of Trump's apocalyptic threats.
Continuous extensions
On April 19, Trump hinted that the United States would send a new delegation to Pakistan for negotiations. However, Iran had not publicly agreed to peace talks. By April 21, the US delegation's mission had been canceled. On the same day, Trump again extended the ceasefire, which was set to expire after two weeks—despite previously labeling such a prospect "extremely unlikely." And then came last week.
Tolerance for Iran's attacks
On Tuesday, the Pentagon announced that several offensive actions by Iran—including fire against US ships escorting commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz and attacks in the United Arab Emirates—did not cross the "threshold" of a ceasefire violation. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth also hinted that these incidents were not even part of the war. He presented the ship protection mission in the straits, which Trump had named Project Freedom, as a separate operation. At the same time, he called on Iran "to show prudence" during the ceasefire.
A friendly strike
It was a stunning moment. Senior American Defense officials seemed to be saying that some Iranian attacks against the United States were acceptable, desperately trying to portray the ceasefire as active. Later that day, Trump terminated Project Freedom, despite the fact that Hegseth, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Dan Caine had spent the whole day explaining its importance. On Thursday, a similar sequence occurred. Despite a new exchange of fire with Iran, in which the US struck military facilities it claimed were responsible for the attacks in the straits, Trump called the incident "just a friendly... strike" and stated: "The ceasefire continues. It is in effect."
Justification
However, more than a month after the start of the ceasefire, there is little evidence it is creating an environment for a deal. It seems more like it has offered two sides that currently do not wish to fight a justification to avoid conflict. This, however, serves Iran more, which has made clear its willingness to endure a protracted conflict. For Trump administration officials, this creates the risk of appearing to be consciously drifting into a situation where they are trying to find an "honorable exit" from a potential stalemate. On Sunday, Trump rejected Iran's latest proposal, calling it "TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE."
Iran has been mocking us for 47 years
While that post drew massive attention, another of his publications might reveal more about his true stance. Earlier on Sunday, he wrote on social media that for 47 years Iran has been "keeping us on hold, playing with us." It seemed as though he was finally realizing that Iran might not be particularly interested in a deal—at least not on terms acceptable to Trump. Perhaps the man who spent two months assuring everyone that Iran is desperate for a deal finally understood that they are not. But it is one thing to recognize it and another to decide what to do about it.
Still betting on diplomacy
And it seems Trump is not yet finished with giving Iran time and space. On Monday, moments before declaring the ceasefire was "on life support" and comparing it to a patient with a 1% chance of survival, Trump suggested on Fox News that he remains focused on a diplomatic solution. "They will buckle," Trump said, adding: "I will keep dealing with them until they make a deal."
Irritated
As CNN reports, citing sources familiar with the discussions, Trump has lost his patience with both the continued disruption of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz and what he perceives as a division in the Iranian leadership, which prevents Tehran from making meaningful concessions in nuclear talks. Iran's latest response, which Trump called both "totally unacceptable" and "stupid," led several officials to question whether Tehran is truly willing to adopt a serious negotiating stance, the same sources said.
Different camps in the Trump administration
Within the US government, different camps are forming regarding how the US should proceed, according to sources. Some, including Pentagon officials, support a more aggressive approach to pressure Iran back to the negotiating table—even through targeted strikes that would further weaken Tehran's position. Others, however, still insist that diplomacy must be given a real chance.
Fire... also at Pakistan
Many in Trump's circle also want Pakistani mediators to be much more direct in their contacts with the Iranians. Some administration officials have long questioned whether Pakistan is aggressively conveying Trump's dissatisfaction with the progress of the talks, as he has expressed publicly. Additionally, some American officials believe that Pakistan often presents a more positive version of Iranian positions to the United States than corresponds to reality, according to two sources. A regional official stated on Monday that intense efforts are being made by countries in the region and Pakistan to convey the message to the Iranians that Trump is disappointed and that this represents the last chance for serious engagement in diplomacy.
Iran ignores them
However, as he said, it does not seem that Iran is listening to or taking anyone seriously. The same official noted that the United States and Iran operate with completely different tolerance limits and different timelines in negotiations, while Tehran has endured economic pressure and sanctions for decades. Trump met again on Monday with the national security team at the White House to examine the next options. Sources with knowledge of the talks say it is unlikely any major decision will be made before the American president's departure for China, scheduled for Tuesday afternoon, 5/12.
Many thorns in the negotiations
The Strait of Hormuz and the American blockade of Iranian ships and tankers, the Iranian nuclear program, the issue of frozen assets and the lifting of sanctions, ballistic missiles, Iran's regional relations, and war reparations; these are just some of the points of contention between the US and Iran. Two major factors must also be added to the negotiation process.
First, the cloud of distrust that exists on Tehran's part toward any attempt at rapprochement or diplomatic cooperation with Washington. This is linked in part to the historical context, as Tehran negotiated with the United States not once but twice while simultaneously facing an unprecedented and sudden campaign of air strikes.
Second, the military rhetoric heard from Tehran in recent days and weeks must be taken into account, as the Iranians state they are trying to maintain the maximum level of readiness for every possible conflict scenario. For now, the situation remains unclear. We will have to wait to see if diplomacy will be given a sufficient opportunity to resolve all these controversial issues between Tehran and Washington.
Chuck Schumer (Democrats): Trump is dragging us into an illegal and costly war without a goal or strategy
Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer launched an attack against Donald Trump, accusing him of leading Americans into an "illegal and costly war without goals and without an exit strategy," while stating that the Democrats will proceed with a new vote to try to stop him. "The best way to reduce costs and end this chaos is to end this illegal war: the Democrats are bringing the War Powers Resolution to a vote for the seventh time this week to withdraw US troops from hostilities with Iran," Schumer said.
"If the Republicans vote against our resolution, they will continue to bear responsibility for Trump's war," he added in a post on platform X. The War Powers Resolution is designed to prevent US presidents from conducting wars without Congressional approval after 60 days of conflict. Democrats have repeatedly attempted to pass this resolution, but since they are the minority in Congress, most votes have devolved into partisan confrontation.
Fire at Trump over the economic situation
President Trump continues to deny that he is under pressure or needs to act immediately. He states that he is willing to take his time. He also insists that the economy will return to normalcy and that oil prices will drop once the war is over. However, no one knows exactly when this war will end. This causes great concern among Americans, who see the cost of living increasing.
It's not just about fuel prices at gas stations. It's also about the prices of everyday products, which are rising due to the surge in diesel costs, leading to more expensive transportation and, consequently, higher prices for products Americans buy from store shelves. There is now broad awareness in American public opinion of the economic problems caused by the war started by President Trump. And this may have a political cost for both Trump and the Republican Party, as many Americans—in fact, the majority—hold President Trump responsible for both the war and the serious economic situation in which they increasingly find themselves.
Ali Akbar Velayati (advisor to Mojtaba Khamenei): We defeated you on the battlefield
The US President, Donald Trump, should not take the current absence of conflict between the US and Iran as a victory as he prepares to travel on May 13 to Beijing, where he will have a critical meeting with Chinese leader Xi Jinping, warned an advisor to Iran's Supreme Leader. "Mr. Trump, never imagine that by taking advantage of Iran's current calm you will be able to enter Beijing triumphantly," said Ali Akbar Velayati, as reported by the Tasnim news agency.
"We defeated you on the 'field of battle,' so never consider that you will emerge a winner in diplomacy as well," Ali Akbar Velayati stated. Trump said on Monday that the one-month ceasefire between the US and Iran is "on life support to a massive degree." Both Iran and the United States have exchanged fire in the Strait of Hormuz since the ceasefire took effect.
Ghalibaf (Iran): We will shock the Americans if they attack us again, we will crush them, they will be surprised, we only discuss the 14 points
The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, stated that Iran's armed forces are ready for battle to give a crushing and worthy response to any aggression, warning enemies that wrong strategies will only bring them disastrous results.
"Our armed forces are ready to give a worthy response to any aggression. Wrong strategy and wrong decisions will always lead to wrong results. The whole world has already understood this. We are prepared for all options. They will be surprised," said Ghalibaf, who claimed: "There is no alternative but to accept the rights of the Iranian people as defined in the 14-point proposal."
"Any other approach will be completely unclear. Nothing else will be but one failure after another. The longer they delay, the more American taxpayers will pay for it," Ghalibaf added, referring to the 14-point proposal Iran sent to the US, which Trump rejected as absolutely unacceptable.
IRGC: The Americans will receive a harsh military response
The Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) Naval Command stated that any attack on Iranian ships in the Persian Gulf or beyond would trigger an immediate and strong military response against American military centers and hostile ships throughout the region. The IRGC reiterated that Iran remains committed to protecting its maritime interests and ensuring the safe passage of its commercial fleet through the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian naval forces have recently intensified their presence in the strategic waterway following US attacks on Iranian ships and tankers near the port of Jask. According to Iranian military sources, IRGC naval units launched retaliatory operations using anti-ship ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and combat drones, causing significant damage to US military assets and forcing American destroyers to retreat from the area. The Iranian military spokesman also warned that any new aggression against Iran would be met with a "surprise" involving new weapons, new methods of warfare, and new battle fronts. He also warned that countries cooperating with the United States in imposing sanctions on Iran could face difficulties when transiting the Strait of Hormuz.
www.bankingnews.gr
Σχόλια αναγνωστών