A Pakistani source involved in the negotiations said discussions were “on track” for Wednesday, despite earlier indications from Iran that it might not attend. U.S. President Donald Trump could join the talks either in person or virtually if an agreement is reached, the source added.

U.S. Vice President JD Vance is expected to travel to Pakistan for the переговоры, according to media reports, while Iranian officials said Tehran was “positively reviewing” whether to send a delegation, without confirming participation.

The diplomatic push comes as a two-week ceasefire in the conflict, which began on February 28, nears its end. A Pakistani source said the truce is expected to expire late Wednesday U.S. time.Financial markets reacted to signs of renewed diplomacy, with oil prices falling more than $1 and equities rising in early Asian trading amid expectations that talks could resume.

Brent crude traded near $94 a barrel, while U.S. West Texas Intermediate fell below $88.Tensions remain elevated, however, following disputes over the U.S. blockade of Iranian ports and the recent interception of an Iranian vessel.

Tehran condemned the seizure and warned Washington would bear responsibility for any escalation.Iranian officials also reiterated that they would not negotiate under pressure. Senior figures, including Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, accused Washington of attempting to force concessions through economic and military pressure.

Washington has said it seeks an agreement that would prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons while stabilizing energy markets. Tehran, for its part, is seeking relief from sanctions and an end to hostilities without compromising its nuclear program.

The strategic importance of the Strait of Hormuz remains central to the negotiations, as the waterway handles a significant share of global oil and gas shipments and has been affected by restrictions imposed during the conflict.

Pakistan, acting as a mediator, has deployed nearly 20,000 security personnel in Islamabad ahead of the potential talks, underscoring the high stakes and security concerns surrounding the negotiations.

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One en route to Washington from Phoenix, Arizona, Trump said the naval blockade on Iranian ports would remain in place regardless of whether the truce is extended. “Maybe I won’t extend it,” he said, adding that without a deal, military operations could resume.

At the same time, Trump struck an optimistic tone about ongoing diplomacy, telling reporters that developments in the Middle East were “going very well” and suggesting a resolution was close. “I think it’s going to happen,” he said, referring to a prospective agreement.

In separate remarks, Trump said there were “no sticking points” remaining in negotiations, describing a deal as “very close,” though he did not provide details on the substance of the talks.The ceasefire, which has paused hostilities between U.S. and Iranian forces, remains fragile amid continued military pressure, including the blockade targeting Iranian ports.

The outcome of negotiations in the coming days is expected to determine whether the truce evolves into a longer-term settlement or collapses, potentially triggering renewed escalation.

Speaking at a diplomatic forum in Antalya, Sharaa said Damascus was seeking either to revive the framework of the 1974 disengagement agreement or to establish a new arrangement guaranteeing security for both sides. He added that progress on such terms could open the door to extended negotiations on the broader Golan issue.

The remarks come after Israeli forces entered a United Nations-patrolled buffer zone separating Israeli and Syrian positions on the Golan Heights following the ouster of former Syrian leader in December 2024.

Sharaa accused Israel of violating the 1974 disengagement accord and said Syria was working toward a security agreement that would ensure Israeli withdrawal to positions held under that arrangement. He reiterated that any future negotiations would depend on restoring those lines.

Israel captured most of the Golan Heights from Syria during the and later annexed the territory, a move not recognised by most of the international community.

Earlier this year, Syrian Foreign Minister said ongoing discussions with Israel were focused on recently occupied areas and did not extend to the broader territorial dispute over the Golan Heights.

Israeli Prime Minister has repeatedly indicated that Israel does not intend to relinquish control over the territory it holds in the Golan Heights.

Two Pakistani officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Islamabad has offered to again facilitate negotiations, although the final venue would depend on whether Washington or Tehran request an alternative location.

They described the initial round of talks as part of an ongoing diplomatic process rather than a one-off effort.The proposal follows marathon negotiations held on April 12 that ended without a breakthrough but were marked by what U.S. Vice President JD Vance described as “some progress,” particularly on Washington’s demands regarding Iran’s nuclear program.

In an interview with Fox News, Vance said Iranian negotiators had moved closer to U.S. positions on the removal of nuclear material and mechanisms to prevent future uranium enrichment, but were unable to finalize a deal, suggesting decisions may require approval from authorities in Tehran.

“There really is, I think, a grand deal to be had here,” Vance said, adding that the next step rests with Iran.The White House did not confirm whether preparations for a second round are underway. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that U.S. negotiating positions remain unchanged and pointed to increased pressure on Iran following the implementation of a U.S. naval blockade.

Multiple sources familiar with the discussions said both sides are considering further in-person talks aimed at reaching an agreement before the ceasefire expires next week. While Islamabad remains a leading candidate to host the meeting, other locations such as Geneva are also under consideration, with timing still undecided but potentially within days.

A diplomat involved in mediation efforts said there is growing alignment on holding another round, though details on the level of representation and agenda remain unresolved.U.S. President Donald Trump said earlier that Iran had reached out seeking a deal, underscoring continued engagement between the two sides even as tensions persist.

In a social media post, Trump said the pope should “stop catering to the Radical Left,” adding that Leo was “weak on crime” and “terrible for foreign policy.” Speaking to reporters later at Joint Base Andrews after arriving on Air Force One, Trump reiterated his criticism, saying, “I’m not a fan of Pope Leo.”

The remarks followed comments by Pope Leo over the weekend condemning what he described as the “delusion of omnipotence” driving the U.S.-Israel war in Iran, and calling on political leaders to pursue negotiations to end the conflict.

The pope delivered his message during an evening prayer service at St. Peter’s Basilica, coinciding with the start of direct talks between the United States and Iran in Pakistan under a fragile ceasefire arrangement.

While Leo did not explicitly mention Trump or the United States, his remarks were widely interpreted as directed at U.S. leadership, which has defended military actions and emphasized American strategic strength in the region.

The exchange marks a rare public dispute between a U.S. president and a sitting pope, and underscores broader divisions over foreign policy and the role of military force in resolving international conflicts.

The negotiation are aimed at ending a six-week conflict between the United States and Iran that has killed thousands across the Middle East and disrupted global energy supplies, contributing to rising inflation and slower economic growth.

The arrival of the U.S. delegation marks a key step in diplomatic efforts to de-escalate the conflict, with Washington and Tehran expected to begin negotiations shortly in the Pakistani capital.

Pakistan has implemented heightened security measures in Islamabad as it hosts the talks, which are seen as a critical opportunity to stabilize the region and address broader economic fallout linked to the war.

The remarks come at a moment when global attention remains focused on pathways toward a sustainable settlement that prevents further escalation and strengthens regional stability.

President Vladimir Putin, speaking ahead of his upcoming visit to New Delhi, said that Moscow expects a resolution that ensures its strategic goals in Donetsk and Luhansk.

At the same time, officials emphasized that discussions with multiple nations, including the United States and partners in Asia, are aimed at pursuing diplomatic channels that keep negotiations open.

Russian authorities maintain that the long conflict in eastern Ukraine began years before the full-scale escalation, shaped by tensions between Ukrainian forces and local groups.

Moscow continues to argue that its interests in Donbas are tied to security concerns and cultural ties, although Kyiv rejects any proposal involving territorial concessions.

Despite stark differences between the two sides, recent engagements with U.S. representatives have drawn international attention.

Putin received envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner in Moscow, calling the meeting productive and describing the dialogue as grounded in proposals earlier discussed with U.S. leadership.

Russian state media highlighted that Moscow has accepted some ideas put forward in ongoing diplomatic exchanges, framing the talks as an important step toward identifying areas of mutual understanding.

While details remain undisclosed, the acknowledgement of progress has been seen by analysts as a positive gesture toward keeping diplomatic avenues active.

Russia currently holds significant portions of Ukrainian territory, including full administrative control of Luhansk and most of Donetsk.

Ukrainian officials nonetheless insist that all regions recognized internationally as Ukrainian must remain under Kyiv’s sovereignty, expressing opposition to any form of territorial compromise.

Even with positions firmly held, observers note that the recent diplomatic activity suggests both sides acknowledge the importance of international mediation.

In particular, the involvement of global actors has helped sustain pressure for dialogue rather than prolonged military escalation.

International organizations continue to advocate for a negotiated outcome rooted in international law, regional security guarantees and humanitarian considerations.

The global community has consistently emphasized the importance of protecting civilians and maintaining the integrity of diplomatic platforms that encourage peaceful resolutions.

For Russia, the Donbas region holds political, historical and strategic significance, making it central to its stated goals.

However, the recent diplomatic tone suggests Moscow remains aware that long-term peace and regional stability will require the involvement of multiple nations and structured discussions.

Ukraine, meanwhile, continues to receive broad international support for its sovereignty as it defends the remaining parts of Donetsk still under its control.

Kyiv also maintains active diplomatic communication with partners to build consensus on a settlement that reinforces its territorial integrity.

As both sides navigate a complex geopolitical environment, global attention remains focused on preventing further military escalation.

Diplomats hope that sustained discussions, even amid disagreements, may eventually help bridge gaps and lead toward a roadmap addressing both security concerns and humanitarian priorities.

With heightened interest from global powers, including major states in Europe, Asia and North America, the coming months will likely see intensified diplomatic exchanges.

The hope among mediators is that continued dialogue will help reduce tensions and create meaningful steps toward a durable, internationally accepted agreement.

A new wave of optimism is sweeping across Sudan as the Rapid Support Forces (RSF) have agreed to a humanitarian ceasefire proposed by the United States and Arab partners.

This development marks an important step toward restoring peace and stability in a nation that has long suffered from conflict and hardship.

The RSF’s acceptance of the ceasefire initiative signals a growing commitment to prioritize humanitarian needs and create a pathway for dialogue.

Their readiness to discuss long-term peace arrangements reflects a positive turn in Sudan’s ongoing efforts to rebuild trust and unity among its people.

The U.S., alongside Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, and Egypt, has been actively working to promote peace in Sudan. The proposed truce aims to allow safe humanitarian access, deliver aid to affected regions, and pave the way for a sustainable political process.

The international community has welcomed the RSF’s statement, viewing it as a step toward ending the two-and-a-half-year conflict.
The United States reaffirmed its dedication to facilitating negotiations that could help both sides find common ground.

“The RSF looks forward to implementing the agreement and beginning discussions on cessation of hostilities and the principles guiding Sudan’s political process,” the group stated. Such language reflects a renewed tone of cooperation and hope, signaling potential progress for the war-torn nation.

The ceasefire plan aligns with growing global calls for peace and stability across Africa. Neighboring countries and humanitarian organizations have expressed support for a coordinated effort to ease the suffering of civilians, especially in famine-stricken areas.

The proposed truce not only promises to reduce violence but also allows for essential aid delivery to displaced families.
Medical organizations like Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) continue their tireless efforts to treat victims and provide relief in North Darfur and other regions.

U.S. officials emphasized the urgency of immediate de-escalation to prevent further loss of life and displacement. Their ongoing engagement with both parties reflects the international community’s determination to help Sudan return to peace and stability.

If implemented successfully, this ceasefire could become a foundation for a long-term peace agreement.
Such an achievement would represent a monumental shift for Sudan, offering new opportunities for reconciliation, rebuilding, and development.

Sudanese citizens, weary from years of turmoil, are expressing cautious hope that this truce may finally open a path toward healing.
Community leaders have called on all parties to honor their commitments and protect civilians at all costs.

This agreement demonstrates that diplomacy and humanitarian concern can still prevail even amid deep divisions. By prioritizing peace over conflict, Sudan’s leaders are showing the world that dialogue remains the most powerful tool for change.

International observers view the RSF’s willingness to cooperate as a signal of shifting priorities within Sudan’s leadership. The promise of accountability for past violations and protection of civilians marks a hopeful beginning for a more responsible and transparent approach.

Peace advocates around the world continue to emphasize that lasting stability in Sudan will require unity, patience, and strong international support. With continued cooperation between Sudan, the United States, and Arab nations, the potential for peace grows stronger each day.

This humanitarian ceasefire initiative represents more than a pause in fighting—it symbolizes a chance for renewal. It allows Sudan to look ahead to a future defined by compassion, dialogue, and shared purpose rather than division.

As the world watches closely, this moment may become a turning point in Sudan’s history. Through collaboration and goodwill, the dream of a peaceful and prosperous Sudan feels closer than ever before.

While Zelenskiy arrived seeking advanced weaponry such as Tomahawk missiles, the talks ultimately centered on diplomacy, dialogue, and the possibility of a negotiated settlement that could bring an end to years of devastation.

Trump’s tone throughout the meeting was notably conciliatory and focused on immediate de-escalation. “You stop at the battle line, and both sides should go home,” he said, urging Ukraine and Russia to “stop the killing” and return to peace talks. His emphasis on diplomacy over weaponry highlights a broader strategic vision — one that seeks to restore stability through negotiation rather than escalation.

The discussion came at a sensitive moment, as both Russia and Ukraine weigh the human and economic costs of a prolonged war. Trump, who is expected to meet Russian President Vladimir Putin in Hungary in the coming weeks, has positioned himself as a potential mediator capable of reviving dialogue between the two nations.

His willingness to engage with both leaders signals a proactive American role in fostering global peace efforts.

President Zelenskiy, while reiterating Ukraine’s right to defend its sovereignty, acknowledged the importance of Trump’s approach. “We want this. Putin doesn’t want (it),” Zelenskiy said, stressing that Ukraine is prepared to work toward a ceasefire if Russia shows genuine commitment. Despite the challenges, the Ukrainian leader expressed optimism that Trump’s influence could help push Moscow back to the negotiating table.

While Trump did not rule out future military assistance, including the Tomahawk missiles requested by Ukraine, he emphasized that the United States must balance its own defense priorities. “We want Tomahawks also. We don’t want to be giving away things that we need to protect our country,” Trump stated.

His words reflected a cautious but clear message — that long-term peace requires more than arms transfers; it requires mutual compromise and constructive engagement.

The meeting, described as “productive” by Zelenskiy, underscored a shared understanding between the two leaders. Following their private talks, Zelenskiy told reporters that while the U.S. was not immediately providing new weapons, he remained hopeful that Trump’s diplomatic outreach to Putin could lead to an eventual ceasefire.

“President Trump is right, and we have to stop where we are. This is important, to stop where we are, and then to speak,” Zelenskiy said.

The international community has responded with cautious optimism. A spokesperson for the European Union welcomed the renewed talks, saying that “any initiative that helps bring peace to Ukraine is a step in the right direction.” The Kremlin also indicated a willingness to continue discussions, noting that while much remains undecided, dialogue remains open.

Observers believe that Trump’s push for direct engagement between Kyiv and Moscow could help break the diplomatic stalemate that has persisted since 2022. His approach, blending realism with negotiation, could pave the way for what many hope will be a sustainable peace framework — one that respects Ukraine’s sovereignty while addressing security concerns across the region.

Beyond politics, the Trump–Zelenskiy meeting reflected a humanitarian shift in focus — from confrontation to cooperation. Both leaders expressed concern for the millions affected by the conflict and stressed the importance of rebuilding efforts once hostilities cease. Trump’s emphasis on “going home to families” resonated with war-weary populations on both sides.

Meanwhile, Zelenskiy’s continued dialogue with European leaders following the meeting suggests a coordinated international effort to support diplomatic solutions. Analysts note that Ukraine’s resilience, combined with Trump’s outreach to Russia, could create a foundation for renewed negotiations under global supervision.

Although uncertainties remain, the White House discussions symbolized a meaningful step toward peace. President Trump’s call for an immediate halt to hostilities, paired with President Zelenskiy’s pragmatic acknowledgment of the situation, offers a glimpse of hope that the war could shift from the battlefield to the negotiating table.

As the world watches, the possibility of dialogue between Washington, Kyiv, and Moscow stands as a reminder that diplomacy — when backed by determination and goodwill — can still change the course of history.

Both leaders’ focus on stability, humanitarian recovery, and cooperation signals a positive path forward, rekindling hopes for peace in Europe’s most enduring conflict.

While the discussions touched upon military aid, the larger tone of the meeting was one of peace, restraint, and strategic dialogue — marking what could be a significant turning point in the conflict’s trajectory.

President Zelenskiy arrived in Washington with clear objectives — to strengthen Ukraine’s defenses and deepen cooperation with the United States. However, what unfolded during the two-hour conversation was a demonstration of pragmatic diplomacy.

Instead of merely discussing weapons, President Trump emphasized the importance of halting the war, saving lives, and seeking sustainable peace.

“Stop the killing. Stop the war. Let both sides return to their families,” Trump told reporters after the meeting, reflecting a clear desire to pursue negotiations rather than escalation.

His comments underscore a broader U.S. aim to balance support for Ukraine with renewed global peace efforts, signaling that Washington is willing to play a mediating role between Kyiv and Moscow.

Despite initial uncertainty about the tone of the talks, both leaders engaged in open and constructive dialogue. President Zelenskiy, while candid about Ukraine’s military needs, also acknowledged the value of diplomatic channels.

His willingness to remain “realistic” about long-range missiles and to continue dialogue with Trump and European partners highlights a maturing strategy that blends defense readiness with negotiation.

Observers noted that the meeting displayed personal warmth and mutual respect between the two presidents. Trump praised Zelenskiy for his determination and resilience, even complimenting his attire — a gesture that lightened the tone and underscored cordial relations.

For Zelenskiy, the meeting provided an opportunity to reaffirm Ukraine’s commitment to peace while keeping international attention focused on his country’s struggle for sovereignty.

Trump’s decision to re-engage in talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin has also reignited hope for diplomacy. His plan to meet Putin in Hungary in the coming weeks suggests a renewed effort to bring both sides back to the table.

While challenges remain, such engagement represents a chance to revive stalled peace initiatives and encourage dialogue over confrontation.

European officials, too, have cautiously welcomed this development. A spokesperson for the European Union said the bloc “supports all meaningful efforts that can help bring peace to Ukraine,” adding that any genuine dialogue is a step in the right direction.

The meeting has therefore not only strengthened U.S.-Ukraine relations but also inspired a more united international front for diplomacy.

Analysts believe Trump’s peace-driven approach — while unconventional — could create opportunities for breakthroughs that eluded previous negotiations. “It’s not about giving up, it’s about finding a way to stop the suffering,” said one expert, emphasizing that diplomacy remains the most powerful tool in preventing further escalation.

For Ukraine, the meeting represents more than just a political conversation. It symbolizes hope — the hope that through strong leadership, persistent dialogue, and international cooperation, peace can once again become a realistic goal.

While the war’s challenges persist, the renewed focus on peace talks provides a moment of optimism in a region weary of conflict. By engaging both Zelenskiy and Putin, the U.S. is attempting to reset the narrative — from one of division and destruction to one of dialogue and de-escalation.

As both nations continue to assess the outcomes of the White House meeting, one thing remains clear: the path to peace is complex, but every step toward understanding counts.

With Trump’s willingness to mediate and Zelenskiy’s openness to compromise, the world may be witnessing the first signs of diplomatic momentum in a long and painful war.

If successful, these discussions could become a foundation for broader negotiations — transforming confrontation into cooperation and setting the stage for a more stable, peaceful future in Eastern Europe.