WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is sending conflicting signals about the state of the U.S.-Iran conflict, declaring the ceasefire finished while simultaneously insisting that fresh military strikes don’t amount to a return to all-out war.
Trump publicly stated he believes the ceasefire agreement has collapsed and suggested he may no longer be interested in reaching a deal, saying American forces might “just finish the job.” Yet the back-to-back military strikes he has authorized are leaving major questions unanswered about where this conflict is heading — particularly given how difficult it was to reach even the initial agreement between the two longtime adversaries just weeks ago.
The rapidly shifting rhetoric could be a calculated pressure tactic aimed at forcing Tehran to stop targeting ships carrying oil and natural gas through the Strait of Hormuz and to comply with U.S. demands on its nuclear program — an approach Trump has employed before.
Whether the statements represent a negotiating strategy or a genuine escalation, mediators are scrambling to rescue the interim deal. The renewed tensions also carry political risks for Republicans, who face midterm elections in November and could be hurt if fuel prices remain elevated.
On Wednesday, Trump warned that another round of U.S. strikes was coming, even while brushing aside comparisons to a full-scale war. Shortly after, the military confirmed it had launched new strikes against Iran aimed at further reducing the country’s ability to threaten shipping through the Strait of Hormuz.
“Anything that happens is going to happen very fast,” Trump said. “We’re not looking for a long time.”
A regional intelligence official involved in the mediation process described the situation as having reached a critical turning point, with mistrust running high on both sides. Still, high-level communications are continuing around the clock in an effort to preserve the ceasefire, according to the official, who requested anonymity given the sensitivity of the behind-the-scenes efforts.
The foreign ministers of Pakistan and Qatar, along with Egypt’s intelligence chief, are spearheading those efforts. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan — whose country hosted the NATO summit that concluded Wednesday — and Saudi Arabian leaders are also participating, the official said.
According to the official, the U.S. is frustrated over the ongoing ship attacks in the Strait of Hormuz and accuses Iran of stalling on discussions about limiting its nuclear program, which was supposed to be a key next step toward converting the interim deal into a permanent end to the conflict.
Iran, for its part, accuses Washington of violating the agreement related to the strait and failing to ensure that a ceasefire in Lebanon — including an Israeli military withdrawal — is being honored, the official said.
Michael Eisenstadt, a former U.S. military analyst who now leads the Military and Security Studies Program at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, suggested the situation remains in a negotiating phase despite Trump’s heated language.
“We’re still in negotiating mode, no matter what the president says,” Eisenstadt said. “This is part of negotiating, and declaring that the MOU is over is part of the negotiation as well,” he added, referring to the memorandum of understanding that formed the foundation of the ceasefire.
Trump, however, has been direct in his public statements, saying he has lost interest in keeping the ceasefire alive: “I think it’s over.”
“We can play games, but I’m not sure I want to make a deal,” he said at the NATO summit in Ankara, Turkey, adding that U.S. forces might “just finish the job.”
Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, who serves as the country’s lead negotiator, accused the Trump administration of repeatedly breaking the terms of the initial agreement, saying Iran had no choice but to respond accordingly.
“The era of bullying and extortion is over. It leads nowhere. We don’t fold,” Qalibaf wrote on X.
Pakistan, one of the countries that helped broker the ceasefire, called renewed conflict “no one’s interest” and urged both sides to honor their commitments. “There is no alternative to continued engagement, dialogue and diplomacy to achieve shared goal of peace in the region,” Pakistan’s foreign ministry said in a statement.
Trump, meanwhile, dismissed Iran’s leadership in sharp terms, calling them “scum” and “sick people” — a stark reversal from just last month, when he described the same leaders as “very rational” and “nice to deal with,” while also calling them “smart people.”
Vice President JD Vance, who played a central role in reaching the initial agreement with Tehran, spoke at an event in Milwaukee on Wednesday. He said Iran “was well behaved for about a week” before resuming attacks on shipping in the strait. “If they shoot at ships, we’re going to knock the hell out of them,” Vance said.
Before the U.S. and Iran reached their first two-week ceasefire in April, Trump had ratcheted up threats, vowing to bomb Iranian bridges, roads, and power plants. He even posted online, “A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.” He repeated similarly stark warnings before a tentative 60-day deal to end the war was reached last month.
While Trump tends to seek leverage through a position of strength, openly declaring the ceasefire dead could also give Iran more military freedom — which in turn risks disrupting oil prices and rattling financial markets.
Ali Vaez, Iran director at the International Crisis Group, cautioned that escalating threats may carry greater risks this time given what’s at stake domestically and internationally for the U.S.
“It certainly looks like an effort to turn up the military heat without yet closing the diplomatic door. But coercive bargaining is a dangerous game: at some point, a pressure campaign can acquire a momentum of its own and become the war it was ostensibly meant to avoid,” Vaez said.
He noted, however, that Iran still has strong incentives to return to negotiations because the country badly needs the economic relief promised under the interim agreement.
Trump has also sent conflicting messages about the economic fallout. He long maintained that rising gas prices for American consumers had no bearing on his Iran decisions — but later acknowledged that avoiding an “economic catastrophe” was part of why he agreed to the interim deal in the first place. He has since highlighted the drop in oil prices that followed the deal’s announcement.
The president has also renewed his previous threats to strike Iranian civilian infrastructure, potentially including electrical plants and desalination facilities, and even to seize Kharg Island, Iran’s major oil production hub.
“We may take over Kharg Island,” Trump said. “There’s not a thing they could do about it.”
With midterm elections less than four months away — and Republicans hoping to hold onto control of both the House and Senate — renewed uncertainty about the war is likely to keep gas prices elevated for American consumers.
Trump tried to minimize those concerns, saying, “Any time we hit them, it goes up a little bit — $2.” In reality, U.S. oil futures jumped significantly higher and may continue to climb. Trump himself acknowledged, “As oil goes, so goes everything else.”
“If we hit Iran, oil goes up a little bit,” he said, arguing the trade-off was justified to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. “It’s all right.”
