Elusive deal: On the Iran-U.S. ceasefire talks

Twenty-one hours of talks in Islamabad between the U.S. and Iran ended without a breakthrough. That no agreement emerged from the first post-ceasefire meeting is not surprising. Nor does it mean that the process has collapsed. Even before the talks began, it was evident that there were huge gaps between the two sides. The two-week ceasefire announced by U.S. President

Donald Trump on April 8, after 39 days of war, looked shaky from day one as Israel stepped up air strikes on Lebanon, killing hundreds. Both Iran, and Pakistan, which mediated the truce, claimed that Lebanon was covered by the ceasefire, while Israel wants to continue the war. There was no mutually agreed framework for the Islamabad talks either. Iran claimed that its 10-point proposal was accepted as the basis for discussion, while the White House said that the 10 points that it received were different from those in the proposal that Tehran had released. Despite differences, the meeting between U.S. Vice-President J.D. Vance and the Iranian delegation headed by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the first face-to-face senior-level meeting between the two sides since the 1979 revolution, marked significant progress.

According to Mr. Vance and Iranian officials, three issues remain contentious — Iran’s nuclear programme, its control over the Strait of Hormuz, and Israeli strikes on Lebanon. Notably, Iran was willing to make a deal on its nuclear programme, the strait was fully open, and the Lebanon situation had not escalated into a full-scale ground invasion before the

U.S. and Israel launched the war on Iran on February 28. U.S.-Israeli bombings have not met their stated objectives. On the contrary, the war has hardened Iran’s position and triggered a whole new crisis over the Strait of Hormuz. Mr. Trump, who unilaterally sabotaged the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal in 2018, should not have started this war. But now that the war has turned out to be a strategic setback for the U.S. and its regional allies, Washington must focus on a negotiated settlement without ultimatums. Iran, for its part, realises that it holds significant leverage, but it should avoid overplaying its hand. Tehran needs credible security guarantees against future aggression and support for reconstruction, while the wanton Israeli killings in Lebanon must end. At the same time, Iran should be open to concessions on the nuclear front and to fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz to global traffic. The Islamabad meeting could be a starting point, if both sides sustain dialogue while holding the ceasefire.