Trump’s 60-day Iran deadline expires. The war goes on

Dubai: Donald Trump gave the United States and Iran 60 days to turn their June 17 ceasefire framework into a broader settlement that could end the war, address Tehran’s nuclear programme and help fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

That clock runs out on Monday (August 17). The war does not.

Instead, Washington and Tehran appear locked in an indefinite contest of economic pressure and political will, with neither side ready to make the concessions needed for a lasting settlement, The New York Times reported.

There have been no publicly reported US strikes on Iranian targets since late July. But the military lull masks the effective collapse of the June memorandum of understanding.

Hormuz remains severely disrupted, US sanctions on Iranian oil have returned, Washington has reinstated its naval blockade, and there has been little indication of substantial negotiations over Iran’s nuclear programme.

60-day clock loses meaning

The June agreement envisioned negotiations towards a broader settlement within 60 days, although extensions were possible.

White House officials are well aware that Monday’s deadline will pass without such an agreement, according to two Americans familiar with the negotiations cited by The Times.

Iran no longer considers the deadline relevant.

What the 60 days were supposed to deliver

• A broader peace deal

• Then: The June memorandum envisioned negotiations towards a wider settlement within 60 days.

• Now: The deadline arrives with no final agreement and talks effectively stalled.

• Reopen the Strait of Hormuz

• Then: The agreement was expected to provide a path towards restoring shipping through the crucial waterway.

• Now: Hormuz remains severely disrupted, with Washington and Tehran at odds over who must act first.

• Address Iran’s nuclear programme

• Then: Tough questions including uranium enrichment were expected to be tackled in subsequent negotiations.

• Now: There has been little indication of extensive nuclear negotiations since June.

• Ease economic warfare

• Then: Iran received sanctions relief and the US temporarily lifted measures including its blockade.

• Now: Washington has restored sanctions on Iranian oil and reinstated its naval blockade.

• End the cycle of military escalation

• Then: The framework was intended to move both countries away from war.

• Now: Large-scale US strikes have paused, but attacks and counterattacks followed the breakdown of the Hormuz arrangements.

• Where things stand

• US position: Iran should reopen Hormuz before Washington fulfils further commitments.

• Iran’s position: Washington must first honour commitments Tehran says were made in June, including releasing frozen assets.

• Result: Each side believes economic and political pressure will eventually force the other to make concessions — leaving the conflict in what analysts call a “game of endurance.”

“We did not have a ceasefire that now needs to be extended,” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said over the weekend. “We had an end to the war, which has now taken on a new status.”

Araghchi said Tehran had yet to decide whether to resume negotiations with Washington.

The June deal gave Iran badly needed sanctions relief while postponing difficult issues, including nuclear enrichment, for later negotiations. But the dispute over Hormuz quickly exposed a fundamental disagreement.

Hormuz becomes stumbling block

Ships moved freely through the Strait of Hormuz before the war began in February.

Iran interpreted language in the June agreement as giving it authority over shipping through the waterway. Tehran subsequently attacked vessels travelling through channels outside Iranian waters, prompting US strikes on southern Iran and another cycle of attacks and counterattacks.

“It was a flawed document; it was hurried out when it wasn’t ready for prime time,” Nate Swanson, an Iran expert at the Atlantic Council, told The Times.

“And they didn’t resolve the most important short-term issue, which was the strait.”

Iran now refuses to fully reopen Hormuz until Washington fulfils commitments it says were made under the agreement, including releasing frozen Iranian assets. The Trump administration wants Iran to end its blockade first.

A ‘game of endurance’

The result is a stand-off in which both sides appear to believe time is on their side.

“Neither side is really ready to finalize a deal,” Ali Vaez, an Iran expert at the International Crisis Group, told The Times.

“They both think that in a matter of days or weeks, the other side will be more desperate for a deal, so they’ll be able to get more out of it.”

“This is why we are locked into this game of endurance again.”

Washington is turning again to economic pressure. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last week that the US was preparing financial penalties unlike any imposed before.

But Swanson argued that greater pressure on Iran’s already strained economy could push Tehran towards escalation rather than compromise.

Nuclear deal remains distant

Perhaps the biggest gap between the June ambitions and today’s reality concerns Iran’s nuclear programme.

There has been little indication that Washington and Tehran have extensively discussed the issue since June, much less developed an agreement acceptable to both sides.

Instead, reopening Hormuz has increasingly become Trump’s immediate focus as disruption to a waterway that normally carries around a fifth of the world’s oil and LNG exports pressures global energy markets.

Neither war nor peace

Trump added another twist on Friday when he said he would soon be “declaring the Hormuz Strait a territory of the United States”.

It was unclear how seriously the remark should be taken, and the White House provided no details of any plan to take control of the waterway.

Iran’s response was unequivocal.

“The Strait of Hormuz has been Iranian, is Iranian, and will remain Iranian,” Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi wrote on social media.

Nearly 60 days after Washington and Tehran produced a framework intended to lead towards a broader peace, neither side has reached peace — and neither appears prepared to concede first.

The diplomatic clock has run out. The contest over who can endure longer is only beginning.