Uncertainty shrouds the so‑called "last-chance talks" between the US and Iran scheduled to take place in Islamabad. The situation has been complicated by the US seizure of the Iranian cargo vessel Tosca and the resumption of mutual threats, calling into question whether a second round of talks will even proceed. Iran insists that the lifting of the maritime blockade is a prerequisite for returning to the negotiating table, adding tension and ambiguity to the conflict-resolution process.
Iran enters the talks relying on several key leverage points. Strategically important is control of the Strait of Hormuz, which Tehran could close in response to sanctions, an action that would immediately affect global energy prices. Other significant cards include an advanced nuclear program with large stocks of enriched uranium and demonstrated military resilience, evidenced during the recent conflict. In addition, Iran is pushing to include Lebanon in a ceasefire agreement and to unfreeze its overseas assets.
On its side, the US is betting on military deterrence and economic pressure. The American administration continues to increase its military presence in the region, threatening to resume full-scale combat if talks fail. The maritime blockade of Iranian ports and the pursuit of vessels linked to Iran have become practical instruments of that pressure. Washington is also seeking the support of international allies to strengthen its diplomatic position in pursuit of a settlement.
The escalation has manifested in concrete actions: the Pentagon announced it would pursue any vessels flying the Iranian flag, and the seizure of the Tosca en route to Bandar Abbas became a vivid example of a tightened maritime blockade. However, experts warn that maintaining such a large-scale blockade alone entails enormous operational and political difficulties in the long term. There are concerns that this strategy could lead not to a settlement but to a protracted war of attrition.
The central and most difficult point of disagreement remains Iran’s nuclear program. The US insists on a complete halt to uranium enrichment, dismantling of key facilities, and removal of stocks of highly enriched uranium from the country. Iran firmly rejects these demands, saying it will never hand over its uranium, especially to the US. Iran’s stocks, estimated at roughly 440 kilograms of uranium enriched to 60%, are a red line for Washington and the main point of contention.
The first round of talks in Islamabad ended without any visible results. In light of the recent escalation and fundamental disagreements over the nuclear issue, the prospects for a second round look murky. There are growing fears that if diplomacy fails once more, the current fragile truce will collapse and the region will be on the brink of a new, even more dangerous round of conflict.
Comments on the story
- Why is control of the Strait of Hormuz such a powerful lever for Iran, and how does it affect the global economy beyond oil prices? - The Strait of Hormuz is a critically important global maritime route through which about 30% of the world’s seaborne oil shipments pass. Iran’s control over this narrow passage gives it the ability to threaten to cut off energy flows, which can trigger an immediate shock in global markets. Beyond oil prices, this affects global supply chains, the cost of maritime shipping and insurance, and can spur inflation and economic instability in energy-dependent countries, especially in Asia and Europe.
- What is the historical and political context of Iran’s demand to include Lebanon in a ceasefire agreement, and which groups in Lebanon are linked to Tehran? - The demand reflects Iran’s strategy of protecting its regional allies, viewing them as part of a unified resistance front. Historically, Iran has supported the Lebanese Shiite group Hezbollah since the 1980s, providing it with military, financial, and ideological backing. Hezbollah is the most powerful political-military force in Lebanon and a key partner of Tehran in the so‑called "axis of resistance," which also includes the Syrian government and Palestinian groups. Including Lebanon in the talks is Iran’s way of securing this strategic asset.
- Why was Islamabad chosen for the talks, and what role does Pakistan traditionally play in US–Iran diplomatic relations? - Islamabad often serves as a neutral mediator or venue for dialogue because it maintains working relations with both Washington and Tehran. Pakistan has historical, cultural, and religious ties with Iran, but it is also a long-standing US partner in the region. This dual position allows it to function as a diplomatic channel, especially when direct contacts between the US and Iran are difficult. Pakistan traditionally seeks to reduce regional tensions, as stability directly affects its own security.
Full version: مباحثات "الفرصة الأخيرة".. ما أوراق القوة التفاوضية لدى طهران وواشنطن؟