The discussions, held days after a Pakistan-brokered ceasefire, marked the first direct engagement between senior U.S. and Iranian officials since Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution. Delegations led by U.S. Vice President JD Vance and Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf met over more than 20 hours at Islamabad’s Serena Hotel, with Pakistani mediators shuttling between the sides.

Despite moments when negotiators appeared close to a framework agreement, talks ultimately stalled over key issues including Iran’s nuclear program, control of the Strait of Hormuz, and access to frozen assets, according to 11 sources familiar with the discussions.

A U.S. official said Washington’s core objective remained ensuring Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon, while Iranian officials emphasized sovereignty concerns, sanctions relief, and broader security guarantees.

Iran has consistently denied seeking nuclear weapons but maintains its right to uranium enrichment.Sources described a tense and shifting atmosphere, with periods of optimism giving way to deadlock. At one stage, the sides were “80 percent” toward an understanding before unresolved political decisions derailed progress, one source said.

Pakistan played a central mediating role, with Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif confirming that efforts to bridge differences are ongoing. Officials said communication between Tehran and Washington continues through intermediaries, even after the formal talks ended.

U.S. President Donald Trump said on Monday that Iran had reached out seeking a deal, though this could not be independently verified. A White House spokesperson reiterated that Washington’s position remains unchanged, particularly its demand that Iran abandon any pathway to nuclear weapons.

Iranian officials signaled deep mistrust, citing past negotiations and subsequent military actions, while also indicating willingness to continue discussions under defined conditions.The Strait of Hormuz remains a central point of contention, with Iran asserting control over the waterway and the United States insisting on restoring unrestricted navigation.

The dispute has had significant implications for global energy markets, contributing to volatility and supply concerns.Mediators, including Pakistani officials and regional diplomats, have continued backchannel communications in an effort to revive talks.

Both sides face mounting pressure to de-escalate, with economic costs rising and broader geopolitical risks intensifying.

Speaking in an interview with Fox News on Monday, Vance said the United States had clearly defined its “red lines” during negotiations held over the weekend in Pakistan, where he led a U.S. delegation in discussions with Iranian officials.“I really think the ball is in the Iranian court, because we put a lot on the table,” Vance said, adding that the U.S. position leaves no room for flexibility on key issues.

He identified two core demands: U.S. control over Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and the establishment of a robust verification mechanism to ensure Tehran does not develop nuclear weapons capability. “It’s one thing for the Iranians to say that they’re not going to have a nuclear weapon.

It’s another thing for us to put in place the mechanism to ensure that’s not going to happen,” he said.The talks in Islamabad marked the highest-level engagement between the two sides in years but ended without an agreement to halt the more than five-week conflict involving U.S. and Israeli forces against Iran.

Vance said that, as part of a two-week ceasefire agreed last week, Washington also expects Iran to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global shipping route that has been effectively closed by Iranian forces.

Despite the lack of a deal, both sides have indicated a willingness to continue discussions, with diplomatic efforts ongoing through intermediaries to prevent further escalation.

United Arab Emirates presidential adviser Anwar Gargash said the UAE had emerged stronger from the conflict, despite efforts to avoid escalation.

“The UAE emerged victorious from a war we sincerely sought to avoid,” Gargash wrote on X, adding that the country was better positioned to navigate regional complexities and influence future developments.

In Oman, officials stressed the importance of mediation and sustained engagement, with the foreign minister pledging support for initiatives aimed at achieving “strong and enduring regional security.”

Omani authorities urged Washington and Tehran to pursue serious negotiations to secure a durable peace.Saudi Arabia also backed diplomatic efforts, with its foreign ministry emphasizing the need for an agreement that addresses underlying causes of instability and long-term threats to regional security.

The responses highlight a broader regional push to consolidate the ceasefire into a lasting settlement, amid concerns over the potential for renewed tensions and the wider impact on Middle East stability.

US officials have reiterated that all options remain on the table in dealing with Tehran, underscoring concerns over Iran’s internal stability, its regional activities, and the potential implications for broader Middle East security. The movement of a major US naval asset is widely viewed as both a signal of deterrence and a message of preparedness, aimed at reinforcing American presence amid uncertainty.

Saudi sources have firmly denied any attempts to influence decision-making in Washington regarding possible action against Iran. Officials in Riyadh have rejected reports suggesting that the Kingdom advised the US against military strikes, emphasizing that Saudi Arabia is closely monitoring developments without lobbying for a specific outcome. This stance reflects a careful diplomatic posture as regional actors seek to avoid further escalation.

A senior Saudi official based in the United States described claims of Saudi intervention in US policy debates as inaccurate, stressing that Riyadh has not sought to steer Washington’s response. The official highlighted that the Kingdom’s priority remains regional stability and the reduction of risks that could spill across borders in an already volatile environment.

Saudi Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Adel Al-Jubeir, speaking earlier this week at a major business conference, acknowledged the gravity of the situation in Iran. While refraining from commenting directly on potential military action, he noted that the international community is watching events unfold very closely and expressed hope that tensions could be resolved in a way that minimizes damage and disruption.

Saudi analysts have echoed this position, emphasizing that Riyadh is not actively lobbying either for or against a strike. Commentator Ali Shihabi stated that Saudi Arabia has not taken part in discussions advocating military action, reinforcing the message that the Kingdom is maintaining a cautious and observant role as events develop.

At the same time, regional commentary has pointed to Iran’s own decisions as a critical factor in determining the path forward. Some analysts argue that Tehran holds the key to avoiding further escalation by addressing core issues related to its nuclear program and its external activities. Such steps, they suggest, could reduce the likelihood of foreign intervention at a moment of intense internal pressure.

The current unrest within Iran has been described by regional observers as one of the most serious challenges the Islamic Republic has faced in decades. Protests driven by economic hardship and political grievances have spread across the country, placing the leadership under unprecedented strain. Combined with external pressure, this has created a situation many describe as a defining moment for the regime.

As Washington deliberates its next steps, the broader Middle East remains on edge. Any decision by the US could have far-reaching consequences, affecting regional security, energy markets, and diplomatic relations. Allies and adversaries alike are assessing signals from Washington, Tehran, and other key capitals, aware that miscalculation could trigger wider instability.

For now, anticipation dominates the regional mood. With US military assets moving into position and diplomatic statements carefully calibrated, the coming days are likely to prove critical. Whether the situation de-escalates through restraint and dialogue or intensifies through confrontation will depend on choices made in multiple capitals, as the region waits for clarity on Washington’s ultimate course of action.