An Ultimatum Repeatedly Postponed The situation escalated last weekend when Donald Trump issued a firm ultimatum to Iran: fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz to international traffic within 48 hours, or face the complete destruction of Iranian power plants and energy infrastructure by the United States. As the deadline approached, the U.S. president first granted a five-day extension, followed by a second ten-day postponement. The new deadline is now set for Monday, April 6, 2026, at 8:00 PM Eastern Time. Trump justified these delays by citing “progress” in the ongoing discussions and even claimed that Iran had requested the additional time. On Truth Social, he wrote: “The discussions are ongoing and, despite the erroneous statements from the Fake News, they are going very well.” He added that Iran was “being obliterated” and that its leaders were “begging to make a deal,” while describing them as “bad fighters but great negotiators.” “Productive” Talks According to Washington, Nonexistent According to Tehran Donald Trump has insisted several times on the existence of “deep, detailed, and constructive” conversations with “respected” Iranian officials. He mentioned “major points of agreement” and stated that Iran wants a “complete and total resolution of hostilities” in the Middle East. According to him, any deal must include Iran’s definitive abandonment of any military nuclear capability (“no nuclear bomb, no nuclear weapon”). On the Iranian side, the message remains clear and unanimous: no negotiations are taking place. The Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, called the American claims “false” and intended to influence oil and financial markets. The Foreign Minister and other officials have repeatedly stated that Tehran is not negotiating with Washington, either directly or indirectly, and that Iran maintains its position on the Strait of Hormuz. Some observers see this as a classic strategy from both sides: Trump seeks to project an image of strength while keeping the door open to diplomacy, while Iran refuses to appear weak publicly in the face of American-Israeli military pressure. Context: A War Entering Its Fourth Week These exchanges come as the conflict in the Middle East, involving Israel, the United States, and Iran (along with its proxies), enters its fourth week. Israeli and American strikes have severely damaged Iranian capabilities, while Iran’s threats or partial closure of the Strait of Hormuz have caused oil and gas prices to surge on global markets. Trump also mentioned that Iran had proposed, as a gesture of goodwill, to allow several oil tankers to pass (he first spoke of “eight big boats,” then revised it to ten). These claims have not been independently confirmed. Markets reacted positively to the postponements of the ultimatum: oil prices fell and stock futures rose, reflecting hopes for a diplomatic de-escalation. Toward a Deal or a New Escalation? As April 6 approaches, the question remains open. Trump has warned that if Iran does not “get serious” quickly, the United States will continue strikes “without restraint.” For its part, Iran has threatened to retaliate against American and Israeli energy infrastructure in the region in the event of an attack on its own facilities. For now, Trump’s strategy appears to combine maximum military pressure with opportunistic diplomatic outreach. It remains to be seen whether Iran’s denials are a tactical posture or a genuine red line, and whether the “discussions” mentioned by Washington truly exist beyond indirect channels (via Pakistan, Oman, or other intermediaries). The world is holding its breath: an agreement would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, lower energy prices, and avoid a major regional escalation. Failure could, however, lead to a new destructive phase of the conflict. The outcome will largely depend on what happens in the coming days, far from the spotlight and the contradictory public statements.