President Donald Trump has rejected Iran’s latest proposal to halt hostilities and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, signaling his belief that Washington can secure more favorable terms by maintaining economic and naval pressure. Speaking to reporters on Saturday, Trump stated, “I reject their proposal,” asserting that Tehran is seeking an agreement because it is “losing so badly.” He added that while he is open to a deal, the current proposal from Iran was not acceptable.
The Iranian seven-day roadmap, unveiled earlier in the week, called for the United States to lift its naval blockade of Iranian ports, waive sanctions on Iranian oil exports, release approximately $12 billion in frozen Iranian assets, and observe a broader regional ceasefire encompassing Lebanon and Yemen. In return, Iran pledged to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and commence negotiations for a final agreement. The terms bear resemblance to a memorandum of understanding signed in June, which collapsed last month amid disagreements over implementation, leading to escalated attacks around the strategic waterway.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi confirmed on Sunday that Tehran had observed Trump’s initial rejection but had not yet received a formal response through Qatari mediators. Qatar has been facilitating diplomatic backchannel talks between the two nations on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in New York.
Analysts suggest Trump’s refusal is rooted in a calculation that the combined impact of the naval blockade and sanctions is finally squeezing the Iranian economy sufficiently. Andreas Krieg, an associate professor at King’s College London, noted that Trump views the proposal as evidence of weakness rather than an opportunity to seize a diplomatic breakthrough. “He thinks time is improving the US bargaining position,” Krieg explained.
Richard Weitz, a senior nonresident associate fellow at the NATO Defence College, added that the White House may believe that continued economic pressure could compel Iran to offer more concessions, similar to the dynamics that led to the 2015 nuclear deal. However, this strategy carries significant political risks for Trump as the US midterm elections in November approach.
A late August Reuters/Ipsos poll indicated that 63 percent of Americans oppose the US-Israel war on Iran, with only 31 percent in support. Rising fuel and transportation costs tied to the disruption of oil flows could exacerbate cost-of-living concerns for voters. Krieg warned that Trump does not want to appear to lift sanctions and restore oil flows merely to regain access to a waterway Iran had disrupted.
“The danger is that he is confusing Iranian pain with Iranian willingness to capitulate. Those are not the same thing,” Krieg said. He suggested that rather than capitulating, Iran might choose to escalate, potentially targeting regional infrastructure or the Bab al-Mandeb strait, where Iran-aligned Houthi forces have recently expanded their control in Yemen. The Houthis have already imposed a naval blockade on Saudi ships using the Red Sea as an alternative route for oil exports.
Mohamad Elmasry, a professor at the Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, noted that Iran’s proposal may have been an attempt to lower energy prices before the US vote, but rejecting it could prompt Tehran to make “Trump pay” for the decline through further escalation. Ross Harrison, a senior fellow at the Middle East Institute, observed that Tehran now perceives the risk of escalation as lower than the political cost of appearing weak by compromising prematurely.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian expressed deep skepticism about future diplomacy, stating in an interview that Iran “no longer trusts” Washington due to previous attacks occurring during negotiation periods followed by renewed sanctions. “We have no trust in the American side,” Pezeshkian said.
Experts conclude that Iran is betting heavily on time, aiming to keep pressure high enough that Trump eventually returns to the negotiating table while making any diplomatic exit increasingly costly for the US president. “Trump thinks Iran’s clock is running faster than America’s. Tehran thinks the opposite,” Krieg said, highlighting the divergent tolerances for prolonged disruption and economic punishment.
Trump thinks he’s winning, but confusing Iranian pain with willingness to surrender is a costly mistake. Escalation seems inevitable now.
This is a dangerous gamble. Ignoring diplomacy when leverage feels high often leads to worse outcomes later, especially with midterms looming.