The talks between the USA and Iran in Islamabad have failed. What this means for the ceasefire and the further course of the war.
April 12, 2026, 2:09 p.mApril 12, 2026, 2:09 p.m
US Vice President JD Vance appears visibly tense at the press conference on Sunday after the meeting with the Iranian delegation.Image: keystone
US Vice President JD Vance has left; talks between him and Iranian negotiators about a final ceasefire have failed. This means that the Strait of Hormuz remains de facto closed and the ceasefire could collapse.
Why did the talks in Islamabad fail?
The starting position was difficult from the start. The Iranians did not come to Pakistan as defeated. They clearly signaled to the USA that their war strategy did not lead to Tehran’s surrender and that concessions were therefore necessary. Iran expert Mahdi Rezaei-Tazik told CH Media on Fridaythat the regime in Tehran emerged from the war stronger and is therefore prepared to make far fewer concessions than before the attacks by the USA and Israel.
Washington insisted on complete nuclear disarmament, the handover of highly enriched uranium reserves and massive restrictions on ballistic missile capabilities. Tehran, for its part, demanded non-aggression guarantees and the lifting of all sanctions, as well as reparations payments and permanent Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz. A European diplomat accredited in Islamabad emphasized to the Washington Post: “Each of these questions had the potential to torpedo an agreement on its own.”
What does the failure mean for the ceasefire?
The two-week ceasefire, which came into force on April 8th, stands on foundations of clay. Even before the actual talks had begun in Islamabad, Israel and Hezbollah were once again engaged in heavy fighting in Lebanon. The Iranian negotiator, Speaker of Parliament Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, made it clear that negotiations could only begin once a ceasefire was in effect in Lebanon and frozen Iranian assets had been released. Both conditions remained unfulfilled.
Workers in Islamabad dismantle a poster advertising the Iran talks.Image: keystone
The Strait of Hormuz is also not really open. The Iranian military continues to coordinate the passage. Shipping companies report protection money of up to two million dollars per ship. Sultan Al Jaber, Minister of Industry of the United Arab Emirates, summed it up: The road is not open; Access is restricted, conditioned and controlled by Iran.
What course will the USA now take towards Iran?
The US is facing a strategic stalemate that has been further exacerbated by the failure of the Islamabad talks, analyzes Israeli Iran expert Danny Citrinowicz. For weeks, American policy had been guided by the assumption that sustained military pressure had weakened Iran’s negotiating position to the point that Tehran would be forced to make significant concessions. But this calculation didn’t work out.
The motorcade of US Vice President JD Vance on the way to the airport after the failed Islamabad talks.Image: keystone
“The options that Washington is now faced with are all problematic,” says Citronowicz. A return to negotiations risks reproducing the same dynamic. Ending the confrontation without agreement would signal American weakness and undermine the deterrent effect. A resumption of the conflict is also unlikely to produce decisive results: a continuation of the war would trigger a broader Iranian response and inflict new damage on global energy markets.
How strong is Iran’s negotiating position really?
Stronger than many observers had expected just weeks ago. Tehran withstood military pressure for 40 days, taking massive military strikes and demonstrating its ability to retaliate. Iran still has its highly enriched uranium reserves. The Iranian military effectively controls the Strait of Hormuz. The Revolutionary Guards have further consolidated their power internally.
What’s next?
After the collapse of the talks, JD Vance said that Iran could still accept the final and best offer from the US. He did not name any concrete steps for further negotiations. The ceasefire is formally still in effect for just under a week and a half. What comes next, nobody knows. A new escalation in which the opening of the Strait of Hormuz becomes the declared goal of the Americans is conceivable. The Iranian military is then likely to use force to defend its most important trump card.
The mood in the Gulf region is divided. The sheikhs in Abu Dhabi and Dubai want stability at all costs. For them, a fragile peace is still better than the next hail of rockets from the Revolutionary Guards. For a reliable agreement between Iran and the USA, writes the Washington Post, citing Western analysts, major powers such as China and Russia would also be needed as guarantors – powers that have connections to both Tehran and Washington.
However, as the US broadcaster CNN reports, China is currently preparing to deliver anti-aircraft missiles to Iran. Beijing denied the media report on Sunday. According to US intelligence, Iran is using the ceasefire to replenish its supplies.
Meanwhile, skepticism prevails in Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who had promised the population a final victory, is under immense pressure domestically. An agreement that grants Iran security guarantees and reparations payments would be difficult for his government to sell – especially not as long as Tehran still has enriched uranium.
What does this mean for the price of oil?
It is certain that tensions in the Middle East will continue to rise following the failure of Islamabad. Traders expect oil prices to rise back to $110 next week. If it is not possible to find a path to peace in the remaining days until the formal end of the ceasefire, it is also possible that the $150 mark could be reached – with devastating consequences for the global economy. (aargauerzeitung.ch)