Iran ceasefire – Mike Waltz says any ceasefire violation decision with Iran is up to President Trump, as both sides exchange fire around Hormuz.
President Donald Trump’s administration is pressing forward with diplomacy with Iran while repeatedly arguing that the question of whether a ceasefire has been violated ultimately rests with the White House.
Speaking Sunday, Mike Waltz, the U.S.. ambassador to the United Nations, said Trump is giving negotiations “every chance” before the U.S.. resumes military action.. “It is up to President Trump as commander-in-chief to determine what constitutes a violation. when to go back to military action or when to continue to give diplomacy a chance. ” Waltz said on ABC News’ “This Week. ” as the U.S.. and Iran continued exchanging fire even after Trump declared a ceasefire.
Trump has said the ceasefire has not been violated, despite reports of exchange of shots between the two sides over the Strait of Hormuz. In comments to ABC News, Trump characterized the strikes as “just a love tap,” while Iran accused the U.S. of breaking the ceasefire.
Waltz said the administration’s approach is shaped by ongoing mediation efforts.. After weeks of negotiations that have not produced an agreement. he said Trump would continue seeking diplomatic off-ramps. pointing to a role for mediators.. “When the mediators. in this case Pakistan. ask us … to give this negotiation another chance before we go back to bombing Iran. then I think that’s completely an appropriate choice for President Trump to make. ” Waltz said.
Retired Adm.. William McRaven, who commanded U.S.. Special Operations Command when the U.S.. killed Osama bin Laden about 15 years ago, disputed Waltz’s framing and said the ceasefire was already breached.. “Of course. the ceasefire has been violated. Martha. ” McRaven said on “This Week.” He added that while he understands Waltz’s position. the practical reality of ongoing exchanges of fire undermines the ceasefire concept. especially if the two sides are expected to reach agreement.
The disagreement highlights a central tension in Washington’s posture: officials are trying to keep diplomatic channels open while preparing for renewed military pressure.. Waltz’s remarks suggest that U.S.. restraint is linked not only to the existence of talks. but to Trump’s determination of what counts as a violation and when military options should return.
In that diplomatic effort, the U.S.. submitted a proposal to Iran described by officials familiar with the matter as one-page and aimed at gradually changing conditions around the Strait of Hormuz.. Under the proposal, Iran would progressively open the strait while the U.S.. would ease its blockade over a 30-day period.. As described, the memo’s current form does not include specific terms tied to Iran’s nuclear program.
Still. officials familiar with the proposal said negotiations during the 30-day window would focus on how the two sides handle Iran’s enriched uranium.. The Trump administration has said restricting Iran’s ability to enrich uranium to levels that could support nuclear weapons capability is a key objective.. Iran, for its part, has maintained that it is not seeking to build a nuclear weapon.
Iranian state media reported Sunday that Tehran sent its response to the U.S.. text through Pakistani mediators, but did not provide details of the response itself.. The absence of details left uncertainty about how far Iran might be willing to move on the Strait of Hormuz and what the next phase of talks could look like.
McRaven. responding to the discussion of the 30-day period. argued that the timeline may be too short for a meaningful nuclear negotiation.. He compared the idea to the time it took to craft the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. formally called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. saying it took more than two years.. In his view, the idea that a complex nuclear arrangement could be negotiated within 30 days was unrealistic.
The debate over timelines also reflects how the dispute has evolved beyond the ceasefire question.. Raddatz pressed Waltz on Trump’s earlier warnings that Iran would have to open the Strait of Hormuz within 48 hours or face destruction of its largest power plants.. Trump did not follow through with that threat. and the strait remains closed. a situation that has helped send global oil prices higher in recent weeks.
Waltz defended the decision not to stick to the earlier timetable by pointing to what he described as Iran’s obstruction of the strait.. He said the U.S.. is also working to build international pressure through the United Nations. arguing for a resolution that would prevent any country from blocking shipping in an international waterway.
“We should take a step back — 50 days to deal with a 50-year-old problem,” Waltz said.. He added that the issue is not new and said Iran has repeatedly threatened or actually blocked passage before. which is why the U.S.. is pushing for a U.N.. resolution asserting that Iran cannot do what it is doing in international waterways.
For markets and diplomacy. the core challenge is that the Strait of Hormuz has become both a strategic choke point and a test of whether negotiations can change behavior quickly enough to de-escalate.. With the U.S.. and Iran still trading accusations about ceasefire violations and shots being fired. the next step—whether agreement arrives or military pressure returns—appears tied to how Washington defines “violation. ” how mediation proceeds. and whether either side is willing to move beyond the current standoff.
Iran ceasefire Mike Waltz Strait of Hormuz UN resolution U.S. diplomacy Pakistani mediation