Washington/Tehran — As ceasefire deadline nears, mediators re-enter the fray amid conflicting signals from both capitals
US President Donald Trump has once again pulled mediators back into the picture, working to extend the fragile ceasefire with Iran before its deadline lapses — the latest twist in a war that has repeatedly seesawed between escalation and de-escalation since February.
Conflicting signals from Ankara and Tehran
Turkey’s Anadolu Agency, citing Pakistani government sources, reported that Washington and Tehran have agreed under a memorandum of understanding to extend the 60-day ceasefire, with both sides said to have signalled willingness to the mediators and to be exchanging messages over how long the extension should run.
Iranian officials, however, have pushed back hard. Senior sources cited by Reuters denied that any US-Iran talks on extending the ceasefire were underway at all — insisting, from Tehran’s vantage point, that no formal start date for the ceasefire even exists, and that there is therefore nothing to extend.
A war that reshaped the region
The dispute over semantics belies the scale of what has unfolded since February 28, when the United States and Israel launched sweeping airstrikes on Iran that killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and ignited a full-blown regional war. US warships fired Tomahawk missiles, the Army deployed HIMARS systems, and additional undisclosed long-range weapons were used alongside B-2, B-1 and B-52 bombers striking fortified ballistic-missile facilities across Iran.
On that opening day alone, roughly 900 airstrikes hit military infrastructure, air defences and government compounds in Tehran, with senior Iranian defence officials also targeted. Among the strikes, a school in Manab was hit, killing 170 people, including female students — a toll that has remained a flashpoint in the conflict’s aftermath.
Pakistan’s mediating role
The path toward de-escalation has run repeatedly through Islamabad. On April 7, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif posted on X calling on Trump to establish a ceasefire; within hours, Trump announced a two-week truce. Talks that opened in Islamabad on April 11 broke down without result, but Trump announced a first extension of the ceasefire on April 21.
By June 14, under continued Pakistani mediation, the US and Iran had signed a memorandum of understanding to halt major combat operations and lift the blockade on the Strait of Hormuz. Negotiations resumed in Switzerland on June 21, this time under joint Qatari and Pakistani mediation, and by June 28 both sides had agreed to a mutual stand-down.
That diplomatic momentum collapsed on July 8, when US Central Command launched a fresh wave of overnight airstrikes, citing Iranian drone attacks on Gulf shipping lanes. Iran retaliated by striking US regional assets, resetting the cycle once again.
Reading Trump’s pattern
Set against this backdrop, the latest Anadolu report fits a now-familiar pattern: Trump announcing ten steps forward before eventually taking ten steps back. A day before his April 7 ceasefire announcement, he had warned that Iran would be “wiped off the face of the earth” if it did not surrender or hand over its nuclear weapons within 24 hours — a threat that drew international condemnation. Sharif’s X post followed within hours, and Trump accepted the opening it offered. Social media speculation at the time suggested the Pakistani statement may have been drafted with US input, giving Trump a face-saving exit.
The latest reported extension push comes just two days after Trump repeated the same “wiped off the face of the earth” threat — reinforcing the sense that his rhetoric and his diplomacy move in opposite directions.
Military leadership urges restraint
Adding weight to the case for de-escalation, US military chief General Dan Caine has reportedly urged Trump’s advisers to find an exit from the conflict, warning that further escalation could backfire and that continued airstrikes are unlikely to deliver the administration’s objectives. A decisive end to the war would likely require a large-scale ground operation — but no one within the administration is currently backing that option.