President Donald Trump has built his political brand as a transactional dealmaker who can bend rivals to his will. Iran, so far, has proven resistant to that approach. Since the United States and Israel launched strikes on Iran in late February, a 38-day military campaign gave way to a fragile ceasefire, reciprocal blockades focused on the Strait of Hormuz, and repeated cycles of stalled talks interrupted by Trump’s threats to resume large-scale attacks.
The standoff has now persisted for more than six weeks, unsettling global energy markets, regional stability and Trump’s domestic standing. Governments, companies and consumers are left asking the same question: what will Trump do next?
In a recent development, Trump said he called off a planned strike after Gulf Arab allies urged restraint. He publicly announced that “serious negotiations” were under way and noted that partners including the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and Saudi Arabia believed a deal could be reached that would be acceptable to the United States. At the same time, he ordered military commanders to remain ready for a full, large-scale assault on Iran should negotiations fail — continuing a familiar pattern of deadlines, threats, temporary pullbacks and renewed pressure.
Three of Trump’s central war aims remain unresolved: persuading Iran to abandon its nuclear program, halt ballistic missile development, and end support for proxy groups operating in Gaza, Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen. Tehran has not met those demands, and its public reactions to the latest pause were defiant rather than conciliatory. Senior Iranian officials have emphasized that diplomacy continues only while their forces remain “on the trigger.”
At the heart of the impasse is the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global energy chokepoint through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas passed before the conflict. Iran’s ability to threaten or effectively close the strait, even as the U.S. enforces a blockade on Iranian ports, has raised fuel prices worldwide and created direct pain for American consumers. Average U.S. gasoline prices have risen sharply since the conflict began, and public approval of Trump’s handling of the economy has been weak: a recent poll showed only about a third of Americans approve of his economic stewardship.
Iran differs from countries the U.S. has pressured successfully in the past, such as Venezuela or Cuba, because it can impose real costs on global commerce by menacing the Hormuz corridor. Another complicating factor is that both Washington and Tehran appear to believe time is on their side. Many Iranian officials view Trump’s military threats as credible while treating his offers to negotiate with skepticism, interpreting diplomacy as a tactic to buy time rather than a genuine path to settlement. That interpretation has been reinforced by prior episodes in which strikes and talks have occurred simultaneously.
Analysts doubt the standoff can be sustained indefinitely. The Strait cannot remain closed forever, and the U.S. cannot maintain an open-ended naval blockade without mounting political and logistical costs; some experts suggest the current posture is unlikely to persist beyond weeks rather than months. Still, Iran has weathered battlefield losses while keeping much of its government apparatus intact and retaining influence over the strait, leaving uncertainty about longer-term intentions — including whether Tehran’s nuclear plans are peaceful or a latent military capability.
The White House insists its approach preserves leverage. Administration spokespeople say the president holds “all the cards” and is prudently keeping every option available. For now, the situation looks set to continue oscillating between negotiation and the threat of force: a fragile pause that could dissolve if diplomacy fails or if either side concludes the other is trying to wait them out. The key variables to watch are the mood of Gulf partners, movements in oil markets, developments at sea in the Strait of Hormuz, and whether Iran makes any concrete concessions on nuclear activity, missiles or proxy support.