Amid heightened military tensions, Iran has proposed a structured, three-stage diplomatic formula aimed at ending the conflict with the US and its allies, while delaying critical nuclear negotiations to the final phase. This strategy, reportedly communicated through regional mediators, seeks to address immediate military threats and maritime logistics before addressing the core nuclear-programme related issues that have defined the US-Iran standoff. President Donald Trump reportedly views the proposal as failing to meet US demands regarding Tehran’s nuclear program and has deemed the terms insufficient.
Following stalled negotiations, Iran's proposed framework, often termed by observers as a "step by step" approach, is designed to rebuild trust and address immediate security concerns before tackling contentious nuclear issues.
The first step requires a comprehensive end to the ongoing military conflict and guarantees to prevent future hostilities against Iran and Lebanon. Iran demands that any ceasefire must be permanent rather than a temporary pause, effectively seeking a halt to US-led military actions.
If the first stage is fulfilled, the second stage involves negotiations regarding the management and administration of the Strait of Hormuz. This involves establishing a new legal framework in coordination with regional actors like Oman to ensure the security of this vital energy shipping route.
Only after the successful completion of the first two stages will Iran agree to discuss its nuclear programme. This is a critical point, as it reverses the US demand of addressing the nuclear issue first, postponing talks on uranium enrichment until after the cessation of the war and maritime stability are secured.
President Trump’s reaction to this formula, as reported by US officials and media, has been one of skepticism and rejection of the staged nature of the proposal. While some initial reports suggested Iran's proposal was seen as a "workable basis", later reports indicated that the administration was dissatisfied as the nuclear issue was not being addressed upfront.
{{/usCountry}}President Trump’s reaction to this formula, as reported by US officials and media, has been one of skepticism and rejection of the staged nature of the proposal. While some initial reports suggested Iran's proposal was seen as a "workable basis", later reports indicated that the administration was dissatisfied as the nuclear issue was not being addressed upfront.
{{/usCountry}}The Trump administration reportedly feels that the proposal is "not good enough" because it defers the most critical security issue. The US has maintained that first and foremost any deal must address the nuclear issue, including halting uranium enrichment.
Despite the Iranian proposal, the Trump administration has continued to apply maximum pressure, including suggestions of a potential imposition of secondary tariffs on countries trading with Iran. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent warned that nations holding Iranian funds or buying its oil face "economic pain" and potential exclusion from the US financial system, particularly citing firms in China, Hong Kong and the UAE
The ongoing deadlock highlights the deep mistrust and divergent priorities between Tehran and Washington. Iran’s strategy, backed by a "step-by-step deterrence" model, aims to secure its position in the region, get sanctions lifted, and retain its nuclear infrastructure. Conversely, the Trump administration's demand for total nuclear concessions—including zero enrichment and the shutting down of major sites—demonstrates a continued, confrontational policy.
The Iranian proposal follows a period of heightened tension and attempts to replace ongoing violence with diplomatic engagement. While it signals a willingness to negotiate, it also sets strict conditions on how that engagement should proceed. The situation remains highly volatile as both sides continue to hold firm on their respective 'red lines'. The failure of this proposed formula to gain traction suggests a shrinking space for diplomacy, with both sides preparing for potential escalation in the region. Despite the impasse, the proposal highlights a key shift in Iran's strategy, aiming to leverage regional stability for sanctions relief before confronting nuclear-related concerns.
Iran's proposal, prioritising cessation of hostilities first, clashes with Washington's demands regarding nuclear enrichment, creating a fundamental divergence which suggests that the Iranian proposal faces significant challenges. President Donald Trump is highly likely to reject Iran's proposal as it fails to address core US demands. Thus, the immediate outlook for the US accepting this specific Iranian initiative is low, but the White House could offer counter proposals so that the diplomatic route remains open.
(The views expressed are personal)
This article is authored Prabhu Dayal, former ambassador, New Delhi.