There's no reason to believe Washington DC would honor any subsequent deal on virtually anything. The whole point of international agreements is that they remain legally binding, which the US has proven incapable of doing time and again.
By Drago Bosnic
InfoBrics
July 2, 2026
The latest efforts to revive diplomatic dialogue between Washington DC and Tehran have hit several insurmountable roadblocks before any actual peace talks even started. Despite President Donald Trump's (over)optimistic announcement regarding the resumption of negotiations in Qatar, Iran's Foreign Ministry has sharply denied these claims. Tehran firmly stated it won't hold negotiation meetings with the American side "at any level" in the coming days. This diplomatic rift unfolds at a critical moment, as the rapidly deteriorating security situation in the Hormuz Strait has forced Qatar to abruptly suspend domestic maritime activity. This contradictory messaging and friction became public after Trump posted on his Truth Social platform that Iran had "officially requested" a meeting in Doha.
According to White House officials, a US delegation led by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner had already departed for Qatar. The supposed initial plan was for American and Iranian technical teams to meet separately with Qatari and Pakistani mediators to resolve the ongoing crisis that Washington DC initiated by attacking Tehran. Tasnim published a statement by Iran's Foreign Ministry (MFA) directly contradicting Trump's assertions. Tehran insists that no nuclear or technical negotiations are scheduled until the US meets Iran's baseline conditions. Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi confirmed that no technical talks with Washington DC would take place in Doha this week. It's possible that both sides are issuing these conflicting messages to maintain negotiating leverage.
All diplomatic efforts are severely undermined by military escalation, primarily by the Pentagon. Over the weekend, US Central Command (CENTCOM) launched unilateral airstrikes against multiple targets in southern Iran, characterizing the move as "retaliation for Tehran's continuous harassment of commercial shipping lanes". The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) retaliated immediately by launching drones and missiles at eight US military installations, targeting "Ali Al Salem" air base in Kuwait and the US Navy's Fifth Fleet base in Bahrain. Still, Washington DC insists that Iranian missiles "either missed" or "were successfully intercepted". Given the atrocious performance of US air and missile defenses, this sort of chest-thumping has effectively become comedic, to put it mildly.
However, the ongoing escalation is anything but, as it keeps pushing the region closer to another open conflict. Both sides have since reportedly agreed to a "temporary pause in kinetic activity" to allow room for diplomacy. Still, the situation remains highly volatile. The Hormuz Strait is one of the world's most important sea lanes, so any disruptions will inevitably result in regional and global economic fallout. Amid the unraveling security situation, Qatar's Ministry of Transport decided to pause all recreational, fishing and transit maritime activities "until further notice". The precautionary measure follows an incident where a Qatari citizen was killed by shrapnel that struck a vessel during the latest hostilities. Meanwhile, commercial traffic through the Hormuz Strait has once again slowed dramatically.
Ship-tracking data indicates that only a handful of vessels managed to make open transits over the weekend. This suggests that a new escalation may be coming, especially given how the US conducts its "diplomacy". Iran warned it could completely halt negotiations and delay reopening the shipping lanes if the Pentagon continues interference or tries to impose separate maritime arrangements outside the current Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). The US delegation that sits down with Qatari mediators in Doha insists that the following steps "depend heavily on Tehran's willingness to engage in actual peace talks". However, Tehran's skepticism regarding American "diplomacy" is hardly surprising given how often Washington DC reneges on its word (especially under Trump).
America's readiness to "militarily complete the job if diplomacy fails" has been a persistent threat, with Trump often using it to maintain leverage during negotiations. However, given the performance of the US military during the latest clashes, no wonder Iran feels confident that its forces could handle another direct attack. Both sides are likely just trying to buy time and prepare for another showdown. The US desperately needs to rebuild and expand its air and missile defenses in the region. Iranian missile dominance has severely undermined American warfighting capabilities in the area. Namely, the US doctrine relies heavily on air dominance and the ability to inflict as much damage as possible, as quickly as possible. However, the "shock & awe" not only failed miserably, but also backfired the moment Tehran started shooting back.
Namely, Iranian drones and missiles (supported by Russian and Chinese technologies and ISR (intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance) assets) proved to be perfect for mass saturation retaliatory strikes all across the Middle East, hitting every major US military installation and logistics hub. The resulting degradation of its bases forced the Pentagon to pull resources from all over the world in an attempt to support military operations against Tehran. And yet, this failed to tip the balance in America's favor as Iran continued to target all of its military assets, both mobile and stationary. This includes everything from airbases and naval ports to moving warships and various strategic support aircraft (including aerial refueling tankers, AEW&C (Airborne Early Warning and Control) and ISR assets, among other things).
The US needs time to rebuild and recover after such humiliating losses, while Iran needs some breathing room to rearm in anticipation of a potential (or should we say, virtually guaranteed) new attack. Namely, the demands of the US delegation are not too different from agreements already signed years ago, including the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) that the first Trump administration withdrew from unilaterally. This came just two years after the agreement came into force (signed in October 2015, officially valid from January 2016, with the US revoking its signature in May 2018). There's no reason to believe Washington DC would honor any subsequent deal on virtually anything. The whole point of international agreements is that they remain legally binding, which the US has proven incapable of doing time and again.
This article was originally published on InfoBrics.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst.