How Did We Get Here? The US-Iran Crisis Explained
- Muhammad Ezairiel Azieq Shahromnizal
- May 14
- 18 min read
Muhammad Ezairiel Azieq Shahromnizal.
Written with the news as of 14th April 2026.
The sirens of Operation Epic Fury and the tightening blockade of April 2026 are not just breaking news; they are the final act of a seventy-year tragedy. To understand how we arrived at this brink, one must look at the bitter irony that Iran’s nuclear foundation was built with American tools. In 1953, the U.S. and UK orchestrated a coup to install the pro-Western Shah, subsequently gifting Iran nuclear technology and education under the "Atoms for Peace" program that now dominates today's headlines. This pillar of U.S. strategy collapsed during the 1979 Islamic Revolution, instantly transforming "once-friends" into existential rivals through decades of hostility, from the Hostage Crisis to the proxy battlefields of the Middle East.
While the 2015 JCPOA offered a brief diplomatic thaw, the 2017 shift toward "maximal pressure" dismantled that bridge, recategorizing Iranian nuclear advancement as an immediate threat rather than a bargaining chip. Today’s escalation is the inevitable collision of two irreconcilable mandates: Washington demands a total end to enrichment and the dismantling of the "Axis of Resistance," while Tehran views its missile program and nuclear rights as the only deterrents against a century of foreign intervention. We aren't just watching a modern conflict on our screens; we are watching the bill for seven decades of strategic miscalculation finally come due in the Strait of Hormuz.
.CHAPTER I: Doctrine of Maximum Pressure
Trump’s inauguration in 2017 marked the end of the engagement-oriented policy of the Obama administration. Trump and his administration viewed the agreement and points amended in the JCPOA as “terrible” and “one-sided”, as the central points of the agreement would eventually lift the restrictions on Iran’s development of missiles and other regional activities, including the missile programme.
JCPOA Withered
Throughout 2017, Trump’s administration team actively reviewed the deals of the JCPOA while also increasing the rhetorical and also the economic cost of the deal. What this means is that the administration claims the “spirit” of the deal is being broken by Iran (The US claims the deal was broken by Iran’s involvement in the “Axis of Resistance” and development of missiles that could be used for both civilians and military, where the former meant for things such as space exploration or satellite launch) despite the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) repeatedly confirming that Iran is still complying with the technical core of JCPOA. At the same time, the administration also reduced the financial relief Iran expected from JCPOA by imposing new sanctions targeting the human rights record, the ballistic missiles program, as well as the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC). The administration also created market uncertainty by signalling to international banks and corporations that the United States’ participation in the deal was precarious.
On May 8, 2018, President Trump finally announced the unilateral withdrawal of the United States from the JCPOA. This decision initiated the “Maximum Pressure” campaign, a strategy designed to assert the dominance of the United States’ financial system to force Tehran back to the table for a “better deal”. The United States used its central position in the global economy to impose primary and secondary sanctions. Secondary sanctions are particularly powerful as it forces foreign institutions to choose between trading with Iran or losing access to the U.S. Market. The engineered dollar shortage is also being put into play here, whereby by 2025, the Iranian Rial fell to a free-fall state. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo articulated twelve demands that served as the benchmark for this policy deal, which include the permanent end of uranium use, disclosure of military involvement in the nuclear programme, and the withdrawal of Iranian-led forces in Syria.
Table 1 - Major Changes that Happened since US' JCPOA Withdrawal
Event Time | Event | Diplomatic/Strategic Outcome | Remarks |
May 8th 2018 | US Withdrawal from JCPOA | The US reimposes all primary and secondary sanctions | |
Nov 5th 2018 | Full sanctions restoration | Iran's oil exports are targeted, and SWIFT access is restricted | The motive of the targets is to sever the Iranian government’s economic lifeline as well as weaponize SWIFT to isolate Iran from the global financial architecture |
April 8th 2019 | IRGC Foreign Terrorist Organisation (FTO) Designation | The IRGC is labelled as a terrorist group | |
May 8th 2019 | Iran’s First “Noncompliance” | Tehran breaching stockpile limits | Iran was supposed to only have 300kg of uranium, and 130 metric tons of heavy water (used in nuclear production) |
July 2019 | Start of Mystery Sabotage | Start of many covert strikes on nuclear infrastructure |
Washington views Iran as an "outlaw regime" that weaponizes terrorism through the IRGC for statecraft. A global legal definition remains elusive, as the line often blurs between "terrorism" and "legitimate struggle" for self-determination. To justify the IRGC’s terrorist designation, the U.S. cites its role as the "Axis of Resistance" architect—funding groups like Hezbollah and the Houthis—and attributes 603 American deaths in Iraq (2003–2011) to its proxies. Specific incidents, including the 1996 Khobar Towers bombing and a 2011 plot against the Saudi Ambassador, further solidified this classification.
Gray-Zone and the 2020 Escalation
Following the economic blockade and sanctions imposed by the United States, Tehran changed its policy from “strategic patience” to “active resistance” in 2019. This leads to a series of “gray-zone” operations (shadow or hidden operations) where the objective is to demonstrate the weakness of the global energy supplies and the U.S. regional assets. The attack includes the sabotage of tankers in the Oman Gulf, the destruction of the United States’ Global Hawk Drone, as well as the attacks on the Saudi Aramco facilities in September 2019. This shows that Washington is unable to protect its allies in the region (specifically Israel and Saudi Arabia), and that their role as the “guarantor” of the world’s sea lanes is being challenged directly. The gray zone attacks also utilise “risk premiums”, where even the threat of an attack increases insurance rates for the tankers, therefore indirectly acting as a form of sanctions in reverse against the U.S. and its partners. U.S. interventionist policy in the Middle East—particularly the Carter Doctrine framework—states that any attempt by an outside force to gain control of the Persian Gulf region is an assault on the “vital interests” of the U.S. and will be repelled by military force.
The series of attacks and escalation reached a critical point on January 3rd, 2020, when one of the U.S. drones killed General Qasem Soleimani, the architect of Iran's regional proxy network, while he was in Baghdad. Iran retaliated by sending a series of ballistic missiles on Al-Asad airbase in Iraq, which also shows the significant capability of Iran on precision strikes (They also avoided immediate U.S. citizen deaths to avoid total war). Following this, Iran announced its fifth and final step of nuclear non-compliance, stating that it would no longer abide by the operational limits under the JCPOA, which includes centrifuge counts and enrichment levels. This allows Iran to gain mastery in advancing the enrichment levels of nuclear energy to levels that are deemed “irreversible” later on when negotiating at the table, which can give Iran an opportunity to demand greater concessions.
CHAPTER II: Biden’s Interlude: Stagnation and Technical Advance
The end of Trump’s first presidency term and the inauguration of Joe Biden as the new president in January 2021 introduced a brief period of diplomatic optimism. The administration expressed its desire to return to the JCPOA as a “starting point” for broader negotiations. However, Iran had utilized the interim years to master advanced centrifuge technology and had begun enriching uranium to 20% purity at the Fordow facility.
Vienna Negotiations & Raisi Election
EU-led indirect talks in Vienna began in April 2021 but faced domestic hurdles. The June 2021 election of hardliner Ebrahim Raisi—replacing centrist Hassan Rouhani—shifted Iran toward demanding permanent U.S. non-withdrawal guarantees and IRGC delisting. By early 2022, negotiations stalemated; the U.S. rejected delisting while Iran accelerated enrichment. Following a second Natanz sabotage in April 2022, Iran increased enrichment to 60%, a weapons-grade "threshold" (90%) with no credible civilian application.
2023 Quiet De-escalation and the Asset Swap
As the world is facing a domestic energy crisis and the distraction of war in Ukraine, the Biden administration pursued an informal de-escalation strategy in 2023. Through the back channels in Oman, the two sides reportedly reached a “technical understanding” where Iran would cap the 60% nuclear enrichment, cease proxy attacks on U.S. troops in exchange for sanctions relief, particularly the oil sales in China. This agreement would then culminate in September 2023, when Iran released five U.S. citizens in exchange for five imprisoned Iranian citizens. Washington would facilitate the transfer of 6 billion dollars of frozen oil revenues from South Korea to Qatar bank accounts, and Iran reportedly slowed down on the uranium enrichment to 60%. However, this “informal agreement” was essentially destroyed due to the October 7th, 2023, attack, in which the agreement couldn’t survive due to it not being written and formalized. Iran still restricts observation access to the IAEA on nuclear development. Following the attack, the U.S. froze the revenue money, and this ended Biden’s diplomatic experiment era.
CHAPTER III: Trump’s Second Coming and Return of Force
Trump’s re-election in November 2024 and his return to the White House in January 2025 mark the immediate shift towards a more “decisive resolution” of the Iran file. Unlike the first term, where the administration would focus on starving the economy, the second term integrates military use into its diplomatic outreach from the meeting. The administration realised that while the Operation Maximum Pressure was effective in severing Iran’s economy, it couldn’t stop the nuclear advancement and the knowledge base. By 2023, Iran had achieved a "breakout time" (or nuclear countdown) of near zero and possessed a significant stockpile of 60% enriched uranium. Assessment found that sanctions alone are no longer able to squeeze out a “better deal” when Iran has nuclear capabilities, despite facilities being sabotaged due to the knowledge base (the scientists and engineers) in the country being intact. This meant that in order to leave a significant impact in Iran, a dismantling from the inside out of the Iranian administration would be carried out to produce a more formal, finalized “deal” between the two nations.
President Trump made finalizing a comprehensive deal a top foreign priority in his administration, while also appointing Steve Witkoff as the Special Envoy for negotiations ahead, including economic sanctions, nuclear advancements, and military activities in the region. His administration also leveraged the regional architecture of the Abraham Accords (including Israel), where they would create a unifying multinational front against Iran, in exchange for the U.S. commitment in the region.
Muscat and Rome Diplomacy
A new round of high-level negotiations was initiated following a direct letter from President Trump to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, where his administration set a 60-day deadline for a breakthrough to be made, framing the talks as the “last chance” before a full-scale war would return.
The first Round (Muscat on April 12th 2025): The delegations led by Washington’s Steve Witkoff and Tehran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met at the Al Alam palace. Iran presented a three-step de-escalation plan that includes a pledge to freeze the regional proxies' activities in exchange for the recognition of their domestic enrichment rights.
The Second Round (Rome on April 19th 2025): The discussion continued at the Oman embassy in Rome. President Trump personally signaled a willingness to meet Khamenei, but the U.S. team privately insisted on the “Zero Enrichment” model, demanding the end of the Fordow and Natanz facilities.
Following the high-level rounds, Michael Anton, representing the U.S., and Majid Takht-Ravanchi, representing Iran, met to bridge the technical gaps. However, the talks stalled over the U.S. Treasury’s decision on April 30 to sanction six Chinese chemical companies due to their link to Iran's missile programme. China remarked on the move as “coercive” and continued to facilitate Iranian oil exports through shadow fleets and avoided banks that use the U.S. dollar system. This heightened the disruption of Middle East trades and also signalled the increased oil barrel price moving forward.
June 2025 Breakdown & 12 Day War
The diplomatic war collapsed in early June 2025. On June 12, the IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution that formally declared that Iran is non-compliant with its safeguard obligations for the first time in two decades. According to the IAEA, Iran was unable to provide design information for new nuclear facilities as soon as the decision to construct them was made, unable to provide a “technically credible explanation” for the presence of man-made uranium materials detected by the IAEA in undeclared facilities, and allegedly reporting that Iran had “sanitized” and relocated the nuclear sites to impede inspection. Within hours, the situation spiraled into direct conflict.
On June 13th 2025, Israel launched a massive, 12-day air campaign targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities, military infrastructure, and the IRGC leadership. At the same time, the United States launched Operation Midnight Hammer, where B-2 Spirit bombers were deployed and utilized GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator to strike deep-buried sites at Fordow and Nantaz. The strikes killed several senior commanders, including Maj. Gen. Mohammad Bagheri and Gen. Hossein Salami, and caused significant damage to the Tehran Research Reactor and uranium conversion plants at Isfahan.
The war resulted in huge environmental impacts, where cities in Iran were covered in soot and acidic residues due to “black rain” caused by damaged oil depots, resulting in the mixing of oil with precipitation. Over 43 vessels were damaged or sunk by the U.S. Navy in the Strait of Hormuz, causing a 20 km-long oil slick. Toxic aerosols from the bombardment of nuclear and chemical sites created clouds of dust mixed with heavy metals and radioactive residues that reduced soil fertility and made the groundwater unfit for consumption. According to analysts, during the first six days of the war, the U.S. military alone released over 2 billion metric tons of CO2.
Independent agencies suggest over 3,400 fatalities and tens of thousands of injuries were caused by the war itself. Over 300 health and emergency facilities in Iran were damaged, including hospital wards. The World Food Programme warns that 45 million people could face acute hunger if the conflict continued, and over 100,000 residential units were damaged, resulting in the displacement of roughly 16 million people in Iran due to the combination of war and subsequent water stress. A Trump-brokered ceasefire was announced on June 23, but the regional impact was already too intense. Iran’s parliament voted to formally suspend all remaining cooperation with the IAEA, and the UN triggered the “snapback” mechanism of JCPOA in August 2025.
CHAPTER IV: Snapback of Sanctions & Winter of Collapse
The “snapback” of United Nations (UN) sanctions on September 28th, 2025, marked the final legal death of the 2015 nuclear deal. The mechanism—which was set to expire on October 18th 2025—allowed the UN to reimpose all previous restrictions on banking, energy, and trade without the possibility of veto. Under the original architecture of the JCPOA, the snapback mechanism was designed to be “veto-proof” for any other nation (than the U.S. and its allies) attempting to block the return of the sanctions. The process is that if a participant of the deal notifies the UN's Security Council (UNSC) that Iran is demonstrating “significant non-performance”, a 30-day countdown would be triggered. To prevent the automatic return of sanctions, they would have to pass a new resolution to continue the sanctions relief, and this is where the U.S. would veto this new resolution, resulting in all previous UN sanctions being automatically imposed, regardless of opposition from any other permanent members (this concept of veto is usually termed as “reverse veto”).
Economic & Domestic Disintegration
The return of UN sanctions—bundled with the U.S. blockade on oil exports—devastated the Iranian economy. The rial fell to a fresh low of 700,000 to a dollar in late 2024 and entered a free fall by late 2025. Massive protests erupted across Iran in December 2025, driven by labor unions and the urban poor. The regime’s response was brutal, using live ammunition and heavy weapons against protestors in events that killed thousands. These internal fissures significantly weakened Tehran’s leverage heading into 2026. At this moment, the U.S. intelligence and the IAEA reported that while the nuclear program was damaged, Iran still has enough enriched materials for up to 10 nuclear weapons, though it lacked a clear path to weaponization.
CHAPTER V: Operation o & 2026 Iran War
In early 2026, the Trump administration concluded that a “strategic outcome” is required rather than just destroying facilities. Therefore, the U.S and Israel launched Operation Epic Fury, which is focused on dismantling the regime’s command-and-control capabilities in Iran, as well as forcing Tehran to “unconditionally surrender” by force.
Decapitation Strike & Regional Conflagration
The initial wave of Epic Fury involved nearly 900 strikes in just 12 hours. The most consequential result was the killing of Ali Khamenei and other top officials in the region. Iran responded with “all-out” retaliation, launching hundreds of missiles and thousands of drones at the U.S. embassies, military installations, and oil vessels in the Strait of Hormuz. The war spread to Lebanon, where Israel forces engaged in a massive bombardment of Hezbollah positions, and to Yemen, where the Houthis opened a new front in March 2026.
Resumption of Coercive Diplomacy
Surprisingly, the war accelerated the diplomatic efforts between the nations. In February 2026, even as the fighting raged, indirect talks were happening in Geneva, where the U.S. delegation, which included Vice President JD Vance and CENTCOM Admiral Brad Cooper, presented a 15-point demand.
The negotiations were mismatched in several objectives and demands. The U.S. demanded “unconditional surrender” in terms of nuclear capabilities, while the Iranian leadership, represented by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Abbas Araghchi, demands “war reparations” and “unfreezing of all assets:
Table 2 - Conflicting Clauses During US-Iran's 2026 Negotiations in Geneva
Strategic Component | What the US’s 15-point demand says | What Iran’s 10-point proposal says |
Nuclear enrichment | 0% domestic enrichment | Right to Enrich |
Facilities | Dismantle Natanz and Fordow | Inspection access with limits |
Hormuz | Free and open maritime zone | “Controlled passage” under the IRGC |
Regional Military | Withdrawal of proxy support | Withdrawal of US forces from the region |
Financial | Limited sanctions relief | Release of all frozen assets + reparations |
CHAPTER VI: Islamabad Talks & April 2026 Blockade
By April 2026, a six-week-old war had reached a stalemate. The U.S. “achieved” air superiority and allegedly destroyed the heart of the regime, but Iran maintained strong control over global energy by blocking the Strait of Hormuz. A two-week ceasefire was announced on April 7 to allow for high-stakes negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan.
The Islamabad Standoff (April 10th to 12th, 2026)
The talks at the Serena Hotel in Islamabad were the most senior direct engagement between the two nations since the 1979 Revolution. The U.S. delegation, led by JD Vance and Steve Witkoff, occupied one side of the hotel wing while the Iranian delegation, led by Ghalibaf and Araghchi, occupied the other side.
The central talks of the negotiations were the “10-point plan” submitted by the IRGC. The plan includes a demand for a permanent aggression against the “Axis of Resistance”, the release of all frozen assets (including the 6 billion dollars in Qatar), and the establishment of a safe transit protocol in the Strait of Hormuz—formalizing the Iranian dominance over the waterway.
However, a significant discrepancy emerged during the talks: The Farsi version of the plan explicitly mentioned “acceptance of enrichment”, a point that was not present in the English version shared with the journalists, suggesting that a deep internal split in the Iranian delegations between IRGC and the pragmatic technocrats.
Collapse of Ceasefire & Naval Blockade
The talks in Islamabad ended on April 12th without a breakthrough. The U.S. delegate accused Tehran of “blackmail”, while the Iranian delegate claimed the U.S. was demanding the “total surrender of sovereignty”. The next day, President Trump declared the negotiations a failure and ordered the U.S. Navy to enforce the total blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. CENTCOM issued orders to intercept all ships that are entering and leaving the Iranian ports. The U.S. deployed advanced underwater minesweepers to clear the Strait of Iranian naval mines, a move which President Trump described as needed to “protect the global economy”. As of the writing of this article, the blockade is still in effect, and the world is bracing for the expiration of the ceasefire on April 22nd.
CHAPTER VII: Analysis of Key Failures and Insights
The decade of confrontation reveals several critical insights into the nature of modern geopolitical conflict and the limits of coercive diplomacy.
Myth of “Clean Strike.”
The wars in 2025 and 2026 showed that even the most advanced conventional strikes cannot “solve” a nuclear problem. While Operation Midnight Hammer destroyed physical labs, it did not eliminate the “knowledge base” or the decentralized centrifuge manufacturing capability. According to assessments in late 2025, Iranian scientists could regenerate their enrichment capability within months, showing that bombing can buy time but cannot replace a comprehensive diplomatic verification regime.
The Transformation of Mediation
The role of regional mediators underwent a fundamental shift. In 2017-2021, Oman and Switzerland were “quiet” facilitators—holding the responsibility of providing venues and hospitality for both delegates in the negotiations. By 2025, they had become active participants, with Omani ministers literally running between rooms in Muscat and Rome. However, Operation Epic Fury in 2026 destroyed the neutral status of several mediators. Qatar, being attacked by Iran, transitioned from a mediator to a state demanding “redress for lost sovereignty", showing how high-intensity conflict can erase the middle ground of diplomacy.
The Domestic Political Imperative
In both nations, negotiation efforts were frequently sabotaged by domestic political needs. Trump’s “Maximum Pressure” and “Epic Fury” were as much about fulfilling campaign promises to the MAGA supporters base as they were about non-proliferation. On the other hand, the Iranian refusal to accept “Zero Enrichment” was tied to the survival of the clerical system’s revolutionary identity. The war in 2026 pushed both systems to their breaking point, with Trump facing record-low consumer sentiment due to the gas price hikes and the Iranian regime facing its true existential threat since 1979.
The Financial Weaponization Paradox
The frozen assets held by the U.S. served as a “carrot” in negotiations, particularly the 6 billion dollars in Qatar. It proved to be a double-edged sword, though, as while it provided the Biden administration with a temporary de-escalation in 2023, the subsequent re-freeze in 2024 created a deep “trust deficit" that led to it being the central topic in the 2025 and 2026 talks. By April 2026, Iran’s demand for “reparations” and “unconditional release” of assets had become a non-negotiable “red line”, effectively not allowing any path that does not involve total Iranian capitulation or a massive U.S. financial payout.
CHAPTER VIII: What’s Next?
As of April 14th 2026, the world remains in a state of hyper-alertness. The U.S. Navy’s move to block the Strait of Hormuz represents the most aggressive use of maritime power in the Persian Gulf in History. If a new framework or a breakthrough is not being done by the ceasefire expiration on April 22nd, the U.S. signaled that it would move to “finish up” the Iranian military and destroy the remaining civilian power grid.
The success or failure of the next few days will depend whether the Islamabad duo of Ghalibaf and Araghchi can sure a mandate from the fragmented IRGC leadership to accept nuclear-zero status in exchange for regime survival, and at the same time, Trump’s administration capability to given what is proposed on the negotiation table for worldwide stability, or if the momentum for “all-out war” has already become irreversible. The global economy, currently reeling from 100+ dollars oil, hangs in the balance as the Trump administration attempts to translate military dominance into a permanent, verifiable regional settlement.
SOURCES
Wikipedia Contributors. (2026, April 13). Iran–United States relations during the first Trump administration. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation.
Zeidan, A. (2025, April 23). Iran nuclear deal negotiations | Summary, Explanation, Trump, Obama, Iran, & United States. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Iran-nuclear-deal-negotiations
Frommer, F. (2024, July). Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) | Iran Nuclear Deal, Snapback Sanctions, Summary, Sunset Clauses, Barack Obama, & Donald Trump. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Joint-Comprehensive-Plan-of-Action
Iran’s Nuclear Deal Since 2016: A Timeline | International Crisis Group. (2022, January 17). Crisisgroup.org. https://www.crisisgroup.org/int/middle-east-north-africa/iran/irans-nuclear-deal-2016-timeline
Putting Diplomacy First. (n.d.). Center for American Progress. https://www.americanprogress.org/article/putting-diplomacy-first/
News, P. (2026, February 25). A timeline of tensions over Iran’s nuclear program as talks with the U.S. approach. PBS News. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/a-timeline-of-tensions-over-irans-nuclear-program-as-talks-with-u-s-approach
Mills, C. (2024, October 2). What is the status of the Iran nuclear deal? House of Commons Library. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-9870/
Arab. (2026, April 7). Are the United States and Iran Moving Closer to a New Nuclear Deal? Arab Center Washington DC. https://arabcenterdc.org/resource/are-the-united-states-and-iran-moving-closer-to-a-new-nuclear-deal/
Iran’s currency was already tumbling — and then news of Trump’s victory broke. (2024). Brandeis.edu. https://www.brandeis.edu/stories/2024/november/election-habibi-trump-victory-iran.html
US. (2020). US has not agreed to unfreeze Iranian assets, White House official says. Arab News. https://www.arabnews.com/node/2639536/amp
Team, S. (2026, April 13). Frozen Iranian Assets: Claim Met With US Denial - Sharecafe. Sharecafe - Serving up Fresh Finance News, Marker Movers & Expertise. https://www.sharecafe.com.au/2026/04/13/frozen-iranian-assets-claim-met-with-us-denial/
Riyadh-Maaal. (2026). Iranian source says US has agreed to unfreeze Iranian funds, Washington denies it. Maaal; صحيفة مال. https://maaal.com/en/news/details/iranian-source-says-us-ha/
Post, K. (2026, April 11). US Reportedly Agrees to Release $6 Billion in Frozen Iranian Assets Amid Peace Talks. Kyiv Post. https://www.kyivpost.com/post/73747
Noonan, F. (2025, September 3). Iran Update, September 3, 2025. Institute for the Study of War. https://understandingwar.org/research/middle-east/iran-update-september-3-2025/
Wikipedia Contributors. (2026, February 8). 2025–2026 Iran–United States negotiations. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation.
Inside the breakdown of U.S.-Iran nuclear talks. (2026, March 24). Wbur.org. https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2026/03/24/inside-the-breakdown-of-u-s-iran-nuclear-talks
From. (2026). TIMELINE – US-Iran tensions: From 12-day war to current standoff. Aa.com.tr. https://www.aa.com.tr/en/middle-east/timeline-us-iran-tensions-from-12-day-war-to-current-standoff/3821761
IAEA provides updates on Iran nuclear facilities. (2026). Ans.org. https://www.ans.org/news/2026-04-06/article-7911/iaea-provides-updates-on-iran-nuclear-facilities/
Board of Governors NPT Safeguards Agreement with the Islamic Republic of Iran Report by the Director General. (2025). https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/gov2025-65.pdf
Wikipedia Contributors. (2025, November 22). Snapback mechanism of sanctions against Iran. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation.
Tabaar, M. A. (2025, October 22). An Obituary for the JCPOA. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/posts/2025/10/iran-deal-jcpoa-obituary
Davenport, K. (2022, March). The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) at a Glance | Arms Control Association. Www.armscontrol.org. https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/joint-comprehensive-plan-action-jcpoa-glance
Iranian Activist Vahid Beheshti To Appear At Israeli Knesset. (2024, January 2). Iranintl.com; Iran International. https://www.iranintl.com/en/202401029946
Hickey, S. (2026, March 11). What do we actually know about Iran’s nuclear program? Not much. Responsible Statecraft. https://responsiblestatecraft.org/iran-nuclear-program/
Britannica Editors. (2026, March 6). 2026 Iran War | Explained, United States, Israel, Strait of Hormuz, Map, & Conflict. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/2026-Iran-War
Wikipedia Contributors. (2026, March 10). Timeline of the 2026 Iran war. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation.
Mounting concern in Oman as Israel assaults Iran-US diplomacy. (2023). Amwaj.media; amwaj.media. https://amwaj.media/article/mounting-concern-in-oman-as-israel-assaults-iran-us-diplomacy
Express Global Desk. (2026, April 8). What is in Iran’s 10-point plan? As Trump deadline ends, Tehran, Washington move towards talks. The Indian Express. https://indianexpress.com/article/world/us-news/what-is-iran-10-point-plan-trump-deadline-washington-tehran-10624768/
High-stakes diplomacy in U.S.-Iran standoff – GIS Reports. (2026, February 23). GIS Reports. https://www.gisreportsonline.com/r/us-iran-standoff/
News, G. (2026, April 13). LIVE UPDATES: Conflict in the Middle East (April 14, 2026). GMA News Online. https://www.gmanetwork.com/news/topstories/nation/983776/live-updates-conflict-in-the-middle-east-april-14-2026/story/
Media, A. (2026, March 6). Iran’s president says mediation underway: Update. Argusmedia.com; Argus Media. https://www.argusmedia.com/en/news-and-insights/latest-market-news/2797574-iran-s-president-says-mediation-underway-update
Mohamad Ali Harisi. (2026, April 11). Iran’s 10-point plan v Trump’s 15-point plan: What each side is asking for. The National. https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/mena/2026/04/11/irans-10-point-plan-vs-trumps-15-point-plan-what-each-side-is-asking-for/
BM Newsroom. (2026, April 7). Brussels Morning Newspaper. Brussels Morning. https://brusselsmorning.com/mediation-efforts-us-iran-talks/96726/
Hendrix, S., & George, S. (2026, April 13). U.S. naval blockade taking effect as Trump demands Iran end nuclear program. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2026/04/13/iran-blockade-us-trump-hormuz/
Arístegui, G. de. (2026, April 10). Atalayar. Atalayar. https://www.atalayar.com/en/articulo/gustavo-aristegui/the-world-hangs-in-the-balance-in-islamabad-the-clash-between-iran-the-us-and-nato-and-the-strait-of-hormuz-crisis/20260410120607224690.html
Watkins, T. (2026, April 8). What is in Iran’s 10-point peace plan? The National. https://www.thenationalnews.com/news/us/2026/04/08/what-is-in-irans-10-point-peace-plan/
Norman, G., Mion, L., Efrat Lachter, Wolf, R., Hays, G., Oliver, A., Colton, E., Miller, A., Casiano, L., & Wehner, G. (2025, June 24). Israel backs away from heavier strikes on Iran, maintaining ceasefire after Trump pressure. Fox News. https://www.foxnews.com/live-news/israel-iran-conflict-june-24-2025
Wikipedia Contributors. (2019, October 18). Iran–United States relations. Wikipedia; Wikimedia Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran%E2%80%93United_States_relations
Ynet. (2026, April 3). US report: Qatar refuses to play central mediation role with Iran. Ynetglobal. https://www.ynetnews.com/article/0y4nexke6
Advisor to Prime Minister: Qatar Not Engaged in US-Iran Mediation, Backs Diplomatic Efforts to End War. (2026). Mofa.gov.qa. https://mofa.gov.qa/en/qatar/latest-articles/latest-news/details/2026/03/24/advisor-to-prime-minister--qatar-not-engaged-in-us-iran-mediation--backs-diplomatic-efforts-to-end-war
Mordowanec, N. (2026, April 9). Iran’s 10-Point Plan, US Negotiations Amid Israel’s Bombardment of Lebanon. Military.com. https://www.military.com/daily-news/2026/04/09/irans-10-point-plan-us-negotiations-amid-israels-bombardment-of-lebanon.html
Gambino, L. (2026, April 11). Democrats urged to reclaim anti-war identity amid Trump’s assault on Iran. The Guardian; The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/apr/11/democrats-iran-trump-war
Amr Hamzawy, Leber, A., Lob, E., & Marwan Muasher. (2026, April 9). The Myriad Problems With the Iran Ceasefire. Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. https://carnegieendowment.org/emissary/2026/04/iran-ceasefire-problems-reactions-lebanon-hormuz
Oman and Iran Hold Crisis Talks as Trump’s “48-Hour” Deadline Looms. (2026). Channel8. https://channel8.com/english/news/55813
Comments