Iran rejected a 15-point US ceasefire proposal delivered via Pakistan, demanding instead reparations and control of the Strait of Hormuz.
AP and Washington Post report Iran dismissed the plan while launching further attacks, with the White House downplaying the rejection.
Commentators call Iran's counter-demands maximalist and performative, with some arguing neither side is genuinely negotiating yet.
Iran on March 25 rejected a 15-point ceasefire proposal delivered by the United States via Pakistani intermediaries, dismissing the diplomatic effort while simultaneously escalating attacks on Israeli and Gulf Arab targets [1].
The US plan reportedly included a 30-day ceasefire, full IAEA nuclear monitoring, and American assistance for civilian nuclear power, according to details that emerged through multiple news outlets [2]. Iran's state television quoted an anonymous official calling the proposal "illogical" and announced Tehran's own counter-demands: reparations from the US and Israel, formal recognition of Iranian sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, and a complete US military withdrawal from the Persian Gulf region [3].
The White House downplayed the rejection. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that the administration rejected "the idea that" diplomacy had failed, though she offered no timeline for renewed talks [4]. The New York Post reported that Iran's counter-demands were widely viewed as maximalist positions designed to stall rather than advance negotiations [3].
The rejection came as Iran continued launching attacks on Israeli and Gulf Arab positions, including an assault that sparked fires in a UAE bunkering hub. Pakistan and Egypt, which had served as intermediary channels, have continued quiet diplomatic efforts despite the public breakdown.
-- Katya Volkov, Washington