U.S. military strikes against Iran on Monday came alongside fresh U.S. diplomatic messaging about negotiations aimed at ending a widening war, underscoring how quickly talks appear to shift alongside battlefield moves. In a statement, a U.S. Central Command spokesman said the strikes targeted Iranian boats and missile launch sites in southern Iran and that the action was taken in “self-defense” while the United States used restraint during the ongoing ceasefire.
The ceasefire, NPR reported, was negotiated to create space for the United States and Iran to negotiate an end to the U.S.-Israel war in Iran. The agreement being discussed has centered on reopening commercial traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, a waterway the United States and its allies have treated as vital for regional security and global shipping.
Speaking in New Delhi, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the United States would “give diplomacy every chance to succeed before we explore the alternatives” before pursuing other options. He also described the proposed agreement as “a pretty solid thing on the table in terms of their ability to open up the strait,” and said the U.S. intended to engage in “a very real, significant, time-limited negotiation on the nuclear matter.”
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, said in a Monday morning post on his Truth Social platform that negotiations with the Islamic Republic of Iran were proceeding “nicely.” But the report said his comments also walked back expectations that a final deal was imminent. Trump had previously told the public Saturday that the U.S. and Iran had “largely negotiated” a memorandum of understanding that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian officials have not officially commented on the proposed agreement, but semi-official outlets have signaled that disputes over “one or two” issues were jeopardizing the potential deal. NPR reported that an Iranian delegation led by parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf traveled to Qatar on Monday for talks, citing the Associated Press. The report also said Qalibaf had led negotiations with Vice President Vance in Pakistan last month.
Some Iran-linked reporting has focused on U.S. demands connected to frozen funds and maritime access. Tasnim, a news agency close to Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, accused the United States of “obstructionism” over the release of some frozen Iranian funds in exchange for lifting restrictions over transit through the Strait of Hormuz. Tasnim also said the proposed agreement would require Iran to restore the number of ships transiting through the strait to pre-war levels within 30 days and would require the U.S. to completely lift its blockade within the same timeframe.
In a separate development, Trump broadened the diplomatic scope of any potential peace deal by urging additional regional normalization with Israel as part of the framework. In social media posts, he wrote that it should be mandatory that countries “simultaneously, sign onto the Abraham Accords,” referring to the 2020 accords that normalized relations between Israel, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates, and that also include Kazakhstan, Morocco and Sudan as signatories.
Trump’s suggested list, as described in the report, included Egypt, Jordan, Pakistan, Qatar and Saudi Arabia, and he also floated the idea that Iran should join. The approach contrasts with earlier U.S. warnings, including a threat in April in which Trump warned Tehran that a “whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”
U.S. allies and regional partners have been observing the talks through the lens of broader regional conflict, including the war that has accompanied the negotiations. The report said the latest diplomatic bid follows attacks by the U.S. and Israel on Iran on Feb. 28 and a ceasefire agreed in April, after Iran struck U.S. military bases and energy infrastructure in retaliation for the earlier strikes. NPR also reported that several thousand Iranians were believed killed in the U.S. and Israeli strikes.
Iranian state-backed reporting also described elements of Tehran’s negotiating demands. The report said Iran’s ISNA quoted a senior Iranian diplomat, Hossein Nooshabadi, who described demands including ending the war on all fronts, releasing billions of dollars of frozen assets, lifting a U.S. naval blockade and opening the Strait of Hormuz, withdrawing U.S. forces from the “surrounding environment” of Iran, and allowing the freedom to sell Iranian oil. The U.S. has pressed Iran to send highly enriched uranium out of the country for safe-keeping, a step Iran has described as a sovereignty issue.
Israel’s position, as described by the report, could also complicate any broader agreement. It said Israel strongly opposes any deal that includes a stop to the war in Lebanon, and that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Trump in a call on Saturday that the president “reaffirmed Israel’s right to defend itself against threats on every front, including Lebanon.” Despite a U.S.-brokered extension to the ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon this month, NPR reported that Israel has continued to occupy southern Lebanon and launch airstrikes, and that Lebanon’s health ministry said more than 3,200 people have been killed in attacks since the war with the Iran-backed Lebanese group Hezbollah began in March.
Meanwhile, Iranian officials and state-aligned social media messaging have reflected a tougher posture toward threats. The report said Iranian parliament spokesman Ebrahim Rezaei wrote that Iran would not yield to threats and that if the U.S. wanted an agreement it should negotiate. Israel’s attacks on the other side of the conflict have also continued; NPR reported Israel said 22 soldiers and a military contractor, along with two civilians, have been killed in Hezbollah attacks.
Republican allies of Trump’s diplomatic push have endorsed the new broad framing, but some regional policy experts questioned whether tying the Abraham Accords’ expansion to a war-ending deal could slow or derail negotiations. Dan Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel, wrote on X that he remained a proponent of the Abraham Accords and their eventual expansion, but called it “needlessly complicated and unrealistic” to tie that expansion to an agreement to end the war with Iran.