Trump demands firm red lines before sealing Iran peace deal.
Tehran denies talks, but political understanding remains unfinished.
The White House said Saturday that President Donald Trump will only approve any peace agreement with Iran if it meets Washington’s conditions, following a nearly two-hour Situation Room meeting focused on the ongoing American-Israeli war with Iran. “The president will only make a deal that is good for America and satisfies his red lines,” a senior administration official said, reiterating that Iran would never be allowed to obtain a nuclear weapon.
The comments come amid muddled signals from both capitals about whether a diplomatic breakthrough is possible. A Trump administration source told The New York Times the president had not yet made a final decision, and that frozen Iranian funds remain one of the thorniest obstacles to any arrangement. Those assets, ambassadors and officials say, are central to Tehran’s bargaining leverage — and to hard-line instincts in Washington that are wary of handing Tehran economic relief without concrete, verifiable guarantees.
At the same time, US officials signaled limited flexibility. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent told the Reagan National Economic Forum that sanctions relief could be considered — but only gradually and tied to clear milestones. Bessent warned that if talks stall, Washington is prepared to ratchet up pressure again, a reminder that any easing would be conditional and reversible.
Washington also moved on a separate front to keep pressure on Tehran: the Treasury announced the seizure of roughly USD 1 billion in Iranian cryptocurrency assets and unveiled fresh counterterrorism sanctions on Iranian individuals and entities. The measures underline a dual US strategy of squeezing Iran economically while probing the diplomatic space for a possible agreement.
Tehran, however, publicly pushed back against what it called Washington’s “language of must.” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said no final agreement has been reached and insisted Iran will make decisions based on its own interests and rights. He denied that Iran was engaged in negotiations over its nuclear program, saying the country’s immediate priority remains ending the war. Baghaei framed US demands as unrealistic ultimatums rather than the basis for mutual compromise.
Yet even as officials traded denials, reports suggested a more complicated reality. A senior Iranian source told Reuters there was a political understanding with the United States that had not been finalized; notably, the source said the talks did not include nuclear issues. That account, if accurate, would sharply contrast with Washington’s repeated public focus on Iran’s nuclear capabilities as central to any deal.
Another flashpoint remains the Strait of Hormuz. President Trump announced the lifting of a naval blockade and urged the strategic waterway be reopened, prompting Tehran to question whether the statements signalled a real, durable shift or were simply media messaging. Iran’s new Persian Gulf Strait Authority claimed Washington has never mastered control of the strait and will not succeed through sanctions, adding that it would continue reviewing passage permits for vessels it deems non-hostile.
Baghaei said decisions about Hormuz should be taken by Iran and Oman, while state-aligned media accused the US of trying to claim a “fabricated victory.” On the ground, civilians continue to pay a heavy price: UNICEF reported an average of 11 children killed or injured each day in Lebanon over the past week amid intensified Israeli strikes, warning of a deepening humanitarian and psychological crisis.
For now, diplomacy and deterrence move in uneasy parallel: Washington tightening economic screws while signalling conditional flexibility, and Tehran oscillating between public defiance and quieter reports of political understandings that have yet to be sealed. The outcome — whether a fragile accord or renewed confrontation — remains painfully uncertain.