"The United States achieved nothing on the battlefield, so expecting to get it on the negotiating table is impossible," says Wang Jianwei, emeritus professor at the University of Macau and director of the Macau Center for Regional and Strategic Studies. "If the Americans think Iran has been beaten and will now accept all their terms, that is another strategic miscalculation."
U.S. Vice President JD Vance meets with Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif during their meeting on April 11, 2026 in Islamabad, Pakistan.
Their assessments came after more than 21 hours of face-to-face talks between Iran and the United States in Islamabad ended early on April 12 without an agreement. The highest-level direct meeting since the 1979 Iranian revolution, brokered by Pakistan, raised hopes for a breakthrough. However, as U.S. Vice President JD Vance said, Washington had laid out its "red lines," but Tehran "chose not to accept them."
Just 24 hours after negotiations ended, U.S. President Donald Trump announced a blockade of maritime traffic entering or leaving Iranian ports, marking a sharp escalation of the tensions.
The nuclear sticking point
Seemingly, at the heart of the collapse is the nuclear issue. Vance said the U.S. demanded that Iran not only halt any current weapons program but also make a long-term commitment to refrain from acquiring the capability or technology to build nuclear arms. "That goal is President Trump's core demand," Vance emphasized.
Iranian officials see it differently. Foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei said the talks added new issues, including the Strait of Hormuz, and that "one should not expect an agreement in a single round." Parliament speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf said the U.S. side "ultimately failed to gain the trust of the Iranian delegation."
For Wang, the rift is fundamental. "Before the war, Iran had already agreed to send its enriched uranium abroad. But now, after being bombed for six weeks, Tehran will never accept a complete ban on its enrichment capacity. That is a matter of principle and sovereignty." He notes the double standard: "Israel has nuclear weapons, yet Iran is not even allowed peaceful nuclear energy. That is simply too domineering."
Zhao Yongsheng, a researcher at the University of International Business and Economics' Academy of China Open Economy Studies, agrees that the collapse was predictable, but he sees room for compromise. "The nuclear issue is largely an excuse," he argues. "Washington and Tel Aviv used it to justify war, but they are not truly afraid of Iranian nuclear capability—it is weak. Iran's real leverage is its economy and its need for reform. A compromise is actually possible."
Zhao adds a domestic political layer. "Iran's negotiating team is relatively moderate, but they face intense pressure from hardliners at home. What they say at the table and what they announce publicly may not be the same. They need to show a tough stance to survive politically." This dual pressure, he says, makes any rapid deal nearly impossible.
The Strait of Hormuz as a red line
Hours after the talks failed, Trump posted on social media suggesting a naval blockade of Iran. The Revolutionary Guards responded that they "fully control the Strait of Hormuz" and warned that any miscalculation would trap the enemy in "deadly whirlpools." Iran's parliamentary deputy speaker added that the strait is a "red line" and transit fees must be paid in Iranian rial.
A ship is seen in the Persian Gulf off the coast of Sharjah the day after the failure of Iran–U.S. peace talks on April 13, 2026.
Wang warns that military confrontation is possible but not easy. "The U.S. does not want a ground war. Without ground troops, can you break Iran's control of the strait? Iran has shore-based anti-ship missiles and artillery. A purely naval or air campaign would struggle." He adds that even a blockade of Iranian ports would not fully cripple the country, which has land routes through Türkiye and Pakistan.
Zhao, however, sees a potential bargain. "Before the war, I predicted that the strait would eventually be jointly controlled by the U.S. and Iran, with tolls shared—say 30% for the U.S. and 70% for Iran. The U.S. provides military protection, while Iran collects the fees. That is the only way out." He believes that while military skirmishes will continue, a full-scale return to war is not imminent. "Both sides need time to regroup. The ceasefire is not a pause—it's a reset."
Time versus military advantage
Iran's strategy, Zhao explains, is to use time. "Iran's advantage is time—it can drag things out. The U.S. advantage is military superiority, but Trump does not want a long war. He wants a quick win." That explains why Tehran says it never expected a single session to produce a deal: "They are trading time for the U.S. military advantage."
Wang points to Trump's domestic troubles. "His approval ratings are terrible, and he planned to visit China in May. Another war would sink that trip. So while he threatens a blockade, it may be just a bluff. The cost of renewed conflict—for oil prices, for the stock market—is too high for him."
A view of the heavy damage at the Pasteur Institute of Iran in Tehran, Iran on April 13, 2026, following military strikes launched by the United States and Israel on February 28.
Both experts agree that the door to diplomacy remains open. The ceasefire still holds, and technical talks continued even after the main delegation left. As a weary Vance put it, the U.S. made its "best, final offer." Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said the two sides came "within inches of an understanding."
The gap, however, remains wide. For Wang, the core problem is trust. "Iran was bombed twice during negotiations over the past year. How can they believe this time will be different?"
For Zhao, the path forward is clear: "Both sides need to realize that the nuclear issue is not the real obstacle. It is about economic survival and regional influence. Once they address that, a deal is possible."
Until then, the world watches Islamabad's leafy boulevards, where the foundations for a diplomatic process—however fragile—have at least been laid.
Reporter: Guo Zedong
Photo: CFP
