US appears to concede to Iran: Hormuz first, nuclear later

Islamabad, Pakistan – Monday morning, the US Navy began escorting commercial vessels through the Strait of Hormuz. By Tuesday afternoon, the operation was suspended.

President Donald Trump announced the reversal on Truth Social, citing a "request by Pakistan and other countries" and "big progress" toward a "complete and final deal" with Iran.

Earlier Tuesday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that Operation Epic Fury — the air and naval campaign launched on February 28 — was "over." Instead, Washington now seeks a "memorandum of understanding for future talks."

For weeks, that was precisely what Iran had been demanding. In proposals relayed to Washington via Pakistan, Tehran offered phased negotiations, with an initial agreement to end the war, while talks on its nuclear program — the White House's requirement — were pushed later.

However, Trump and his administration had balked, with the US president insisting that Iran abandoning its nuclear program was central to any deal.

Now, experts say the US appears to have accepted Iran's terms. Reuters and Axios reported that the US and Iran are close to a one-page memorandum of understanding to end the war, though no detailed talks on Tehran's nuclear program have occurred.

Seyed Mojtaba Jalalzadeh, an international relations analyst in Tehran, said the week's diplomatic signals reflected a reassessment in Washington of what is achievable. "Moving toward a memorandum of understanding, a framework for future talks, is a good, feasible, and crucial first step to resolve the immediate issue," he told Al Jazeera.

Shift amid a fragile ceasefire

Pakistani officials close to the US-Iran mediation effort said Islamabad's role intensified in recent days, with senior officials directly communicating with both sides.

Wednesday afternoon in Islamabad, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif responded to Trump's announcement to suspend the Strait of Hormuz escort operation, also naming Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman as a partner urging the US president to halt the military campaign.

Pakistan, Sharif wrote on social media, "is hopeful that the current trajectory will lead to a long-term agreement that ensures lasting peace and stability for the region and beyond."

Just 24 hours earlier, that optimism seemed misplaced. Since the weekend, the already fragile ceasefire between the US and Iran appeared to be cracking. Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was accused of launching missiles and drones at the UAE on Monday and Tuesday — the first attacks since the April 8 ceasefire. An oil facility in Fujairah was hit, wounding three Indian workers. Iran denied involvement. Both the US and Iran claimed to have struck each other's vessels and denied the other's success claims.

Nevertheless, Washington declined to escalate. Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Dan Caine said the incidents remained "below the threshold of restarting major combat operations." US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said the ceasefire "certainly holds."

Has Washington blinked?

The central question is whether the US has tacitly accepted Iran's core demand: end the war and resolve the Strait of Hormuz issue first, and address the nuclear issue later.

Secretary Rubio's Tuesday speech showed a clear shift from Washington's initial stance. At the outset, the US outlined four objectives: destroy Iran's ballistic missile capability, eliminate its navy, cut off support for armed proxy forces, and ensure Iran never obtains a nuclear weapon. A 15-point proposal relayed to Tehran via Pakistan in late March went further, calling for dismantling nuclear facilities, handing high-enriched uranium to the IAEA, and a permanent ban on nuclear weapons development.

In contrast, Rubio declared the military phase over. Nuclear materials, he said, "need to be addressed" and "are being addressed in talks," but he declined to give details. What Washington now seeks is a memorandum of understanding, a framework defining "the topics they agree to negotiate" and "concessions they are willing to make up front."

That marks a significant shift from March. Early in April, Rubio warned that "a civilization will die tonight" if Iran did not concede. This week, he called for a deal to be "finalized and signed."

This change did not go unnoticed in Tehran. When Trump launched Project Freedom — the escort operation for trapped ships through the Strait of Hormuz — on Sunday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi posted on X that "there is no military solution to a political crisis," calling it "Project Deadlock." Within 48 hours, the operation was suspended.

Andreas Krieg, associate professor at King's College London's School of Security Studies, described the shift as a limited but significant concession. "Washington has accepted that resolving the war, Hormuz, and the nuclear file simultaneously in one final package is not feasible at this point. Diplomatically, this is a concession to Tehran," he told Al Jazeera.

Remaining gaps

Iran's position remains consistent. After sending a 14-point proposal to Pakistan on April 30, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei made the sequencing clear: "At this stage, we have no nuclear talks." The proposal calls for ending the war within 30 days, lifting the US naval blockade, unfreezing Iranian assets, compensation, lifting sanctions, and establishing a new mechanism to manage the Strait of Hormuz. Nuclear talks are deferred.

Iran received the US response via Pakistan on Sunday. Neither side disclosed its contents. However, significant gaps remain. Rubio made clear that Washington's definition of "opening the strait" differs from Tehran's. "Under no circumstances can we accept a world where coordinating with Iran, paying them to pass through the Strait of Hormuz, is normal," he said. Meanwhile, Iran's proposal calls for a "new mechanism to manage the strait," language Washington may see as exactly such an arrangement.

"Neither side has a good offer on the table because even the Iranians don't yet know how they want to manage it," Jalalzadeh said.

Diplomatic clock

Several deadlines are converging, and none favor delay. Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi traveled to Beijing on Wednesday for talks with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi, his first trip to China since the war began in February. The visit comes eight days before a scheduled summit between Trump and President Xi Jinping on May 14-15. US officials have publicly pressed China to pressure Iran to open the strait. However, analysts say Beijing's willingness to pressure Iran is limited by its own confrontation with Washington. Last week, China's Ministry of Commerce ordered domestic companies to defy US sanctions on five Chinese oil refineries that buy Iranian crude.

Gulf states are also pushing from another direction. Saudi Arabia calls for restoring the Strait of Hormuz to its pre-February 28 status and demands safe, unconditional passage for vessels — a stance echoing Washington's demands and conflicting with Tehran's insistence on a new management mechanism.

The upcoming Hajj pilgrimage also creates its own constraint. With around 1.8 million Muslims expected to converge on Mecca from about May 25, including Iranian pilgrims, any escalation in this period would carry severe political costs for all sides.

Krieg said the converging deadlines make some form of deal more likely, but not its content. "Washington wants to maintain military pressure without burning the diplomatic path. In negotiating language, such a move looks more like a limited confidence-building measure than a strategic concession. The timeline increases the odds of a limited agreement but reduces the odds of a big one."