The constitutional 60-day period for U.S. military action against Iran ends today, but the Trump administration says the truce announced in April legally halted hostilities. Democrats dispute that interpretation, insisting there is no clear legal basis to pause the countdown. That raises questions about whether the president can avoid seeking a new mandate from Congress or whether lawmakers will force a firmer stance.
The War Powers Act of 1973 gives the president 60 days to conduct hostilities without Congressional approval, with a possible 30-day extension to ensure the safety of U.S. forces. Trump notified Congress of the operation within 48 hours after it began on February 28, and the deadline would have fallen on May 1. However, the administration contends that the ceasefire suspended the clock, while Democrats insist the law does not allow such a pause, making current actions formally illegal.
In his statements, Trump describes Iran as "in collapse" and claims Tehran requested talks about reopening the Strait of Hormuz. At the same time, the president insists on maintaining a naval blockade until Iran agrees to a new deal that would definitively resolve its nuclear program. "Iran cannot have nuclear weapons," he emphasized, while leaving room for diplomatic maneuvering.
Despite the rhetoric about negotiations, military options remain on the table. U.S. Central Command has drafted plans for short but powerful strikes on key targets inside Iran to break the impasse in talks. Military leaders have already presented these scenarios to the president. Other options include seizing control of part of the Strait of Hormuz and possible deployment of land forces, as well as forming an international coalition to ensure freedom of navigation.
Pakistan's mediation efforts continue: Islamabad has opened channels of dialogue between Washington and Tehran and offered to host talks in its capital, though a second meeting has not yet taken place. According to sources, Iran put forward a three-stage peace plan that calls for cessation of U.S. and Israeli military actions, non-aggression guarantees, and subsequent talks on a permanent settlement. Trump rejected the initiative, fearing he would lose the chance for a "victory" in the conflict.
Tehran warns that a return to war is possible if the blockade continues. Some Iranian circles already view the continued sanctions as an act of aggression requiring a military response. Officials acknowledge, however, that achieving a comprehensive agreement will take time and require rebuilding mutual trust. Thus, the situation remains explosive: diplomatic initiatives run up against hardline positions on both sides, while military plans continue to be developed pending a resolution.
Comments on the news
What strategic importance does the Strait of Hormuz hold for Iran and the global economy, and why is control over it key in this conflict? — The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway through which about 20% of the world’s oil passes. For Iran it is an important lever of pressure: the threat to block the strait can sharply raise energy prices and disrupt global supplies. Control over the strait gives Tehran the ability to affect the economic stability of oil-importing countries, especially in Asia and Europe, strengthening its negotiating position.
What are the main stages of Iran’s nuclear program, and why has it worried the U.S. for decades? — Iran’s nuclear program began in the 1950s with U.S. assistance, but after the 1979 Islamic Revolution it became secretive. In the 2000s Iran initiated uranium enrichment, raising suspicions about weaponization. The U.S. fears Tehran could use the civilian program as cover to develop a bomb, altering the balance of power in the Middle East. International agreements (for example, the 2015 JCPOA) temporarily limited the program, but the U.S. withdrawal from the deal in 2018 deepened mistrust.
What role does Pakistan play as a mediator between the U.S. and Iran, given its historical and religious ties to Tehran? — Pakistan shares a long border with Iran and has strong cultural and religious links (including Shiite communities in Pakistan). This makes it a convenient mediator, as it can engage in dialogue without arousing Tehran’s suspicions. However, Pakistan also seeks to maintain good relations with Saudi Arabia (a major rival of Iran) and the U.S. In the past Islamabad has repeatedly offered its venue for talks, but the success of its missions has been limited by Pakistan’s internal problems and deep mutual distrust between Washington and Tehran.
Full version: بين لغة التفاوض وخيارات السلاح.. هل أنهت الهدنة الحرب مع إيران؟