ISLAMABAD - Intensive US–Iran negotiations held over two days in Islamabad hosted by prime minister Shehbaz Sharif ended without a peace accord on Sunday, following marathon talks that exposed deep divisions over nuclear, security and regional issues, despite what both sides described as “substantive” engagement. The high-level diplomacy, widely referred to as the Islamabad Talks, began on April 11 and continued into the early hours of April 12, spanning roughly 21 hours of continuous discussions mediated by Pakistan. Delegations led by US Vice President JD Vance and senior Iranian officials arrived in Islamabad on Saturday, holding initial rounds with Pakistani leadership before entering direct and indirect negotiations at a heavily secured venue. The talks were the first direct high-level engagement between Washington and Tehran in decades and were aimed at consolidating a fragile ceasefire reached earlier in April and preventing further escalation in the region. Diplomatic sources said discussions on April 11 focused on core issues including sanctions relief, nuclear commitments, freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, and broader regional security arrangements. Negotiations extended overnight into Sunday, reflecting both urgency and the complexity of the issues at hand. Officials described the exchanges as detailed and, at times, difficult, with multiple proposals and counter-proposals discussed. Pakistani mediators facilitated several rounds of engagement, with officials indicating that “constructive” progress was made on some technical aspects, though major gaps persisted on key political questions. Iran maintained demands for sanctions relief, reparations, and recognition of its strategic rights, while the United States pressed for firm guarantees on Iran’s nuclear program and regional conduct. Addressing a press conference after the conclusion of talks, Vice President Vance confirmed that no agreement had been reached. “We had a number of substantive discussions — that’s the good news,” Vance said. “The bad news is that we have not reached an agreement.” He added that Washington had clearly outlined its conditions: “We have made very clear what our red lines are… the Iranian delegation has chosen not to accept our terms.” Vance stressed that the United States is seeking a “fundamental commitment” from Iran not to pursue nuclear weapons or the capability to rapidly develop them. In a pointed remark, he said:“We have not reached an agreement, and that’s bad news for Iran much more than it’s bad news for the United States.” US officials described the proposal presented in Islamabad as a “final and best offer,” leaving the next move to Tehran. Iranian officials signaled that they had not expected a breakthrough in a single round of talks, describing the negotiations as part of a longer diplomatic process. Tehran maintained that progress would depend on US “good faith,” particularly on sanctions relief and recognition of Iran’s rights, while acknowledging that differences remain “far apart” on several key issues. The failure to reach a deal has cast uncertainty over the fragile ceasefire currently in place, with analysts warning that the absence of immediate progress could risk renewed escalation. Despite the deadlock, both sides indicated willingness to continue engagement, and Pakistani officials expressed hope that dialogue would resume soon to preserve diplomatic momentum. As delegations departed Islamabad on Sunday, the outcome underscored both the significance of the talks and the scale of challenges ahead in translating dialogue into a durable peace framework. Both delegations before start of formal trilateral talks, also held bilateral talks for two rounds. Prime minister Shehbaz Sharif was accompanied by CDF Field Marshal Asim Munir, DPM/ FM Ishaq dar. The trilateral talks format continued for 5 hours over working dinner.
ISLAMABAD - Intensive US–Iran negotiations held over two days in Islamabad hosted by prime minister Shehbaz Sharif ended without a peace accord on Sunday, following marathon talks that exposed deep divisions over nuclear, security and regional issues, despite what both sides desc…
See this event through different lenses
Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.
Compare PerspectivesLoading notes...
International mediators have proposed a 10-day ceasefire between the United States and Iran, according to a senior Iranian official cited in reports. The measure is described as intended to reduce hostilities and allow renewed talks on a prior interim agreement.
Both sides are assessing next steps in the current regional security situation.
Reports indicate that a US-Iran ceasefire has broken down amid renewed fighting, with the potential impact of mediation efforts by Pakistan, Qatar, and Oman remaining unclear. Earlier diplomatic steps included a June memorandum of understanding between the parties for further negotiations and talks hosted in Geneva in February.
The summary also references Europe’s historical role in diplomacy, including the 1814-15 Congress of Vienna.
Donald Trump stated in a Fox News interview that his representatives had spoken with Iranian officials an hour earlier and that those officials wanted to make a deal to end the conflict, though he noted they had broken prior agreements and expressed uncertainty about whether one would be reached.
He added that people do not want to die and that Iran would need to proceed carefully to avoid further losses. The remarks come amid an ongoing US-Iran conflict that has involved casualties and shipping disruptions in the Strait of Hormuz, with some social media users criticizing the repetition of similar statements.
Why the Iran-US ceasefire is falling apart Iran and the US have resumed fighting because they don’t see each other as ‘reliable negotiating partners’, says analyst Ali Vaez. Neither Iran nor the United States seems able to deliver a “knockout blow at an acceptable price” to the other side, and both know “they have no choice other than engaging in diplomacy”, but they’re not ready to make uncomfortable concessions, argues Ali Vaez, director of the Iran Project at International Crisis Group.
Vaez tells host Steve Clemons that Tehran and Washington are trying to “enforce their own interpretation” of the ceasefire agreement they signed last month. President Trump has become “frustrated” with diplomacy because he’s not seeing “the kind of quick results that he likes to see”, Vaez says.