The Trump administration and the Iranian regime both state a preference for a diplomatic solution to the war, yet a deal remains elusive due to irreconcilable differences in negotiation style and deep-seated mistrust. Two failed rounds of negotiations in the last 18 months have led to two wars, with the June memorandum of understanding collapsing within days and leading to renewed escalation. If current diplomatic efforts end in deadlock, another outbreak of fighting is likely within weeks.
A primary source of friction is the differing approach to time. Karim Sadjadpour, a senior analyst at the Carnegie Endowment, describes the U.S. under Trump as an "attention-deficit superpower" incapable of sustaining a long-term strategy, while characterizing Iran as an "obsessive-compulsive theocracy" fixated on resisting America. Sadjadpour summarized this dynamic by saying, "Trump has ADD; Iran has OCD." In April 2025, Trump set a 60-day deadline for negotiations, which Sadjadpour called unrealistic. The Iranians viewed the process as longer-term and did not take the deadline seriously. Subsequent negotiations in February lasted only about three weeks, offering near-zero chances for an agreement.
The two sides also disagree on the nature of the desired outcome. Trump envisions a legacy-making accord that redefines the relationship between the United States and Iran and reshapes the Middle East. In contrast, Iranian leaders prefer a narrow, transactional deal negotiated with the lowest possible public profile. They view any agreement as a truce rather than a peace treaty. Sadjadpour noted that in Iranian political culture, the word for compromiser is practically a slur. He added that Iranian leaders were never willing to meet directly with Trump, arguing that their identity is premised on continued confrontation with the U.S.
Mistrust further impedes progress. The Iranian side claims Trump cheated them by attacking them during negotiations. Many inside the Iranian regime view talks as a ruse to mask preparations for a surprise attack. U.S. officials counter that Iran violated the June 2026 memorandum of understanding by attacking ships in the Strait of Hormuz days after signing. U.S. officials also cite concerns that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps or other radical elements within the regime may not abide by any deal negotiated with more pragmatic members.
Domestic politics complicate matters for both governments. In Iran, officials supporting a deal face constant attacks at home, pushing them toward harder lines in talks. In the United States, Trump faces pressure from the right not to cut a deal and criticism from the left for potentially accepting terms resembling President Obama's 2015 nuclear deal or restoring the pre-war status quo. This criticism has caused Trump to pull back from moderate positions he adopted earlier in the year.
White House envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, along with Vice President Vance, still believe diplomacy is worth pursuing, but Trump appears more skeptical. In an interview with Time magazine published Thursday, Trump stated that Iran's current offer is "not good enough" and said he does not believe peace with Iran is possible. He reiterated that he is considering resuming major combat operations after the midterms.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian defended the negotiations on Thursday, stating that Iran will not run away from dialogue despite U.S. attacks after signing agreements. He said, "The U.S. should get rid of the idea that it would bring us to our knees through terror." However, other Iranian officials, particularly inside the IRGC, view negotiations as useless and believe ending the war requires inflicting more costs on the battlefield.
Mohammad Ayatollahi Tabaar, an associate professor at Texas A&M University's Bush School of Government and Public Service, wrote in Foreign Affairs that Iran is adopting a strategy defined by escalation and continuous offense. Tabaar stated that the regime wants the removal of all U.S. forces from the region and is prepared to remain on a wartime footing indefinitely to achieve this.