US, Iran and mediators discuss terms for a 45-day ceasefire

[Twiglets1]

As reported by Axios, the U.S., Iran and a group of regional mediators are discussing the terms for a potential 45-day ceasefire that could lead to a permanent end to the war, according to four U.S., Israeli and regional sources with knowledge of the talks.

Four sources with knowledge of the diplomatic efforts said the negotiations are taking place through Pakistani, Egyptian and Turkish mediators and also through text messages sent between Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff and Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

• A U.S. official said the Trump administration gave Iran several proposals in recent days, but so far Iranian officials hadn't accepted them.
• The sources said the mediators are discussing with the parties the terms for two-phased deal; the first phase would a potential 45-day ceasefire during which a permanent end to the war would be negotiated.
• The ceasefire could be extended if more time were needed for talks, one of the sources said.
• The second phase would be an agreement on ending the war.
• The sources said mediators think that fully reopening the Strait of Hormuz and a solution for Iran's highly enriched Uranium — either through its removal from the country or dilution — could only be a result of a final deal.
• These two issues are Iran's main bargaining chips in the negotiations and the Iranians will not agree to fully give up on them for only 45 days of ceasefire, two of the sources said.
• The mediators want to see whether Iran could take partial step on both issues in the first phase of the deal. They are also working on steps the Trump administration could take to give Iran guarantees that the ceasefire will not be temporary and that the war will not resume.

www.axios.com/2026/04/06/iran-war-us-tehran-ceasefire-talks

Do not block peace talks, Iran’s most senior Sunni cleric warns Tehran

Iran’s most senior Sunni cleric warned those blocking peace negotiations that they would be held accountable before the Iranian people for the “destruction” of their country.

Molavi Abdolhamid Ismaeelzahi, the Friday prayer imam of the city of Zahedan, blamed “hardliners” in Tehran for “stubbornly” preventing talks.

He said: “The sky of the country is in the grip of the enemy, infrastructure faces destruction, and the armed forces do not have the necessary tools for air defence.”

Mr Ismaeelzahi added: “The hardliners who today stubbornly prevent peace – tomorrow, in the face of the ruins of the homeland, what answer will they have for God and this oppressed nation?”

The majority of Iranians identify as Shia Muslims, with only a minority of around five to 10 per cent of the population following Sunni Islam.

www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/2026/04/22/iran-war-latest-news-trump-israel-strait-of-hormuz2/

At least 34 tankers linked to Iran, including vessels carrying crude oil, have successfully bypassed the U.S. blockade, per FT

Iran has attacked 3 cargo ships and boarded two, so hostilities are increasing again.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/cx297218m9vt

@Twiglets1 thanks for that latest update from what seems to be a fairly powerful cleric.

Hopefully this will carry some weight although one hopes he survives these comments. Also gives us a glimpse of their turmoil and issues and the pressure they are under.

Assassination of the Iranian leaders didn’t quite work out how CIA and Mossad hoped?

« Khamenei was killed along with seven “members of the top Iranian security leadership who had gathered at several locations in Tehran” and about a dozen members of his family and close entourage in near-simultaneous strikes within 60 seconds, military officials in Israel said. Forty other senior Iranian leaders also died in the attack. »

« Some experts and intelligence veterans, however, described a possible strategic error that could alienate potential supporters or open the way for more radical opponents in the future.
“The problem is that Israel is in love with assassinations … and we never learn that it is not the solution. We have killed all the leaders of Hamas. They are still there. It’s the same with Hezbollah. The leaders are always replaced,” said Yossi Melman, a respected Israeli analyst and author specialising in intelligence. »

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2026/mar/01/how-israeli-sleight-and-us-might-led-to-the-assassination-of-ali-khamenei

Look what we have here! Secretary of the US Navy is leaving, effective immediately!

I wonder if it has anything to do with the evidence given to the US congress that it would take 6 months to clear the Strait of Hormuz of mines and this could only happen once the fighting in the region stops? Imagine what that means to the world economy and takes it up nicely to the midterm elections in the U.S.

A case of shooting the messenger?

Seems to me that one set of hardliners just got replaced by another set of hardliners. It’s not like the previous lot were moderates is it, based on how they dealt with the civilian uprising in January.

The assassins were largely symbolic and a show of military skill. Though they allow Trump to be unable to claim “regime change” most people think they look pretty interchangeable from the last lot.

I think the Sunni cleric makes a valid point that the current IRGC leaders do need to engage in peace talks soon to limit how accountable they are held by the Iranian public for the state their economy will be in after the war.

The US were banking on both sides wanting and needing peace now but the IRGC didn’t behave logically in my opinion by saying they weren’t coming to the negotiating table. They are very concerned about “saving face” to the detriment of what is good for Iran. The Lebanon leadership by contrast are being pragmatic in looking for solutions after decades of conflict with Israel. Their current leadership wants Lebanon to prosper financially and recognises that better relations with Israel and the US will help to achieve that. Then again, Lebanon are not governed by terrorists, which helps.

The previous lot were brutal towards Iranian civilians but were prepared to negotiate. Your post itself suggests a change in stance towards negotiation.

Their killing wasn’t « symbolic « it’s been reported that CIA/ Mossad thought it would result in regime change and the world wouldn’t be were we are now. Trump - when he did give justification for the war- said regime change was one of the goal of the war. Analysts feel he’s on shaky ground claiming that the regime has changed.

If you think that their killing was purely symbolic -it suggests a contemptible disregard for life. I don’t agree with you - the manner it was done (coupled with the bombing) suggests they hoped the regime would topple.

You seem to agree with those who think it was pointless though.

The other repercussion of taking out the leadership is that there’s a void at the top - it’s not clear whose in charge. That’s also why the regime hasn’t topple apparently - the leadership left is diffused.

All parties involved have been reckless - Iranians with their own economy in particular. Israel and the US with the world’s which is arguably worse. The closure of the strait was entirely predictable if the regime didn’t change, which was also a miscalculation.

Netanyahu has allegedly been wanting the US to support him to attack Iran for years. Obama negotiated with Iran for a reason.

Hezbollah putting down their arms may also be (partly?) a negotiation stance of Iran- as there is currently a ceasefire. The Iranians asked for the bombing of the Lebanon to stop as part of an initial peace deal. This was followed by 10 mins of comprehensive bombing of their northern border by the IDF, killing hundreds

www.theguardian.com/world/2026/apr/09/lebanon-beirut-israel-strikes-hundreds-killed

The previous lot were not engaging in good faith, if the US felt they were, there would have been no reason for them to go to war against the regime.

Trump's office did not list regime change as a formal goal of the war, the goals are mainly to do with the nuclear issues. What Trump did say was that it was hoped that regime change would come about as a result of the war. Both Trump and Netanyahu acknowledge that regime change can only come from within Iran, and that may yet happen given the economic repercussions for the IRGC in this war dragging on, and the US now blockading Iranian ports in the Straight of Hormuz.

One thing we can agree on is that killing the top tier of the IRGC has not bought about regime change (only in Trump's mind) so in that sense, yes it is only a symbolic change of regime leadership.

This article is dated the 9th April and the ceasefire started on 16th April so I don't know why you are linking this article now on the 23rd April?

Lebanon are indeed wise to negotiate with Israel. Particularly in light of what IDF and Hezbollah have have done to their country. This article is one demonstration of that. Iran was prepared for a ceasefire prior to the 16th April.

It takes the development of trust to negotiate in good faith. We keep being informed that this is required.

Sorry the article irks you. I can understand why.

The previous lot were not negotiating in good faith? They were not the ones to break two rounds of negotiations by bombing. Do you know how long Obama’s team took to come to a conclusion in their negotiations with Iran?

Trump hasn’t been clear about his goals at all. That’s been on of the criticisms levelled against him. However - he did speak of regime change.

On the first of March 2026:

« According to Donald Trump, Iranians have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. “The hour of your freedom is at hand,” he declared, as U.S. and Israeli warplanes pounded Iranian cities and the compound of the country’s supreme leader. “When we are finished, take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will probably be your only chance for generations.”
Trump’s comments made clear that America is seeking regime change. After decades of high tensions, tough recriminations and one-off attacks, Washington finally decided to try getting rid of the country’s government altogether — and it thinks ordinary Iranians will rise up and finish the job. »

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2026/03/01/iran-uprising-trump-khamenei-regime-change-00806179

We must read different news sources, but this was widely reported.

The article doesn’t irk me I just don’t understand why you are bringing up an article about something that happened before the ceasefire when making a point about the ceasefire 🤷🏼‍♀️

With Iran both sides talk about trust but there is zero trust. Hopefully the Lebanese & Israeli governments can gain enough trust in one another that the meetings today are productive. The words coming out from both sides are conciliatory in nature compared to the US & Iran, so it’s looking hopeful.

Trump’s words make it clear he was hoping regime change would happen from within Iran after the war:

“When we are finished take over your government. It will be yours to take. This will probably be your only chance for generations”.

It is up to the Iranian people if they rise up against the regime again after the war and if they can successfully overthrow them. The US can only hope to create the conditions to help them achieve this by weakening the IRGC militarily and economically.

Trumps words make it very clear

Rightio 😂

Indeed. Here is a summary of what Trump said earlier that I clipped from another thread a while back. Clear as the mud pack facial thing my DD uses.

News Eye
@newseye.bsky.social
A Reddit user has meticulously kept a diary of Trump’s daily victory claims. It should form part of every historical archive on the planet. Brace yourself, here goes 🧵👇
Mar 3: "We won the war”
Mar 7: "We defeated Iran”
Mar 9: "We must attack Iran”
Mar 10: "The war is ending almost completely, and very beautifully”
Mar 11: “You never like to say too early you won. We won. In the first hour it was over”
Mar 12: "We did win, but we haven't won completely yet”
Mar 13: "We won the war."
Mar 14: "Please help us."
Mar 15: "If you don't help us, I will certainly remember it."
Mar 16: "Actually, we don't need any help at all."
Mar 16: "I was just testing to see who's listening to me."
Mar 16: "If NATO doesn't help, they will suffer something very bad."
Mar 17: "We neither need nor want NATO's help”
Mar 17: "I don't need Congressional approval to withdraw from NATO”
Mar 18: "Our allies must cooperate in reopening the Strait of Hormuz”
Mar 19: "US allies need to get a grip - step up and help open the Strait of Hormuz”
Mar 20: "NATO are cowards."
Mar 21: "The Strait of Hormuz must be protected by the countries that use it. We don't use it, we don't need to open it."
Mar 22: "This is the last time. I will give Iran 48 hours. Open the strait"
Mar 22: "Iran is Dead"
Mar 23: "We had very good and productive talks with Iran."
Mar 24: "We’re making progress."
Mar 25: “They gave us a present and the present arrived today. And it was a very big present worth a tremendous amount of money. I’m not going to tell you what that present is, but it was a very significant prize.”
Mar 26: "Make a deal, or we’ll just keep blowing them away."
Mar 27: "We don’t have to be there for NATO."
Mar 29: Claimed talks were progressing
Mar 30: "Open the Strait of Hormuz immediately, or face devastating consequences."
Mar 31: Claimed a deal was "very close" and that Iran would "do the right thing" Apr 1: "We’ll see what happens very soon."
Apr 2: Repeated that a deal was likely, while warning of continued strikes if not. Apr 3: "Something big is going to happen."
Apr 4: Said Iran must comply "immediately" or face further consequences.
Apr 5: "Open the fuckin' Strait, you crazy bastards, or you'll be living in Hell - JUST WATCH! Praise be to Allah." ENDS

I really want this as tonight’s news headliner 🤣🤣

To "understand" Trump you need to dig into his mentor/fixer Roy Cohn who met him when Trump was only 23.

https://ideas.bkconnection.com/the-five-lessons-roy-cohn-taught-donald-trump-that-guide-him-to-this-day

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/06/donald-trump-roy-cohn-relationship

Sometimes it easy to forget that Trump started in Real Estate and Casino's, both industries that historically had ties to organized crime. If you read Trump’s words as if they come from an old school mobster they make a lot more sense, Trump’s attempting a shakedown.

I found the Reddit thread, someone else ran those dates through Chat GPT and came up with this:

Using the 2026 calendar, these dates fall like this:
• Fridays: Mar 13, Mar 20, Mar 27, Apr 3
• Saturdays: Mar 7, Mar 14, Mar 21, Mar 28, Apr 4
• Sundays: Mar 8, Mar 15, Mar 22, Mar 29, Apr 5
• Mondays: Mar 9, Mar 16, Mar 23, Mar 30, Apr 6

A. Weekends skew toward spectacle and absolutism
The strongest weekend lines include:
• “Iran is dead”
• “Please help us”
• “This is the last time. 48 hours.”
• “Open the fuckin’ Strait…”
• “Higher oil prices is a small price to pay”
That does look like a pattern.

Weekends here seem to be used for:
• emotional spikes,
• raw threats,
• loyalty pressure,
• vulgarity or shock,
• absolute declarations.
That makes strategic sense in media terms. Weekend statements can dominate attention more easily because there is less competing institutional noise.

B. Mondays often act as reset days
Mondays repeatedly look like reframe days:
• Mar 9: attack + “ending beautifully”
• Mar 16: “don’t need help” + “just testing”
• Mar 23: “productive talks”
• Mar 30: ultimatum + “serious discussions”
• Apr 6: “bomb the hell out of them”
So Monday is not tied to one tone. It is tied to narrative repositioning.
The weekend creates the emotional surge. Monday tells you what story this week is going to be.

C. Fridays often tee up the next act
Friday quotes include:
• Mar 13: “We won the war” / “Iran is dead” / “Iran wants a deal but I won’t accept it”
• Mar 20: “NATO are cowards.”
• Mar 27: “We don’t have to be there for NATO.”
• Apr 3: “Something big is going to happen.”
That looks like Friday is often used to:
• harden the villain frame,
• create suspense,
• or plant the next escalation beat.
I would say:
Fridays often prime the audience. Weekends deliver the emotional detonation. Mondays shift the frame.

I was using a quote embedded in the longer post by @Islandsofsand but you didn't laugh when they quoted Trump only when I quoted them quoting Trump.

Hmmm ... Netanyahu also said regime change needs to come from within and whatever you think of him, he is more consistent than Trump.

So they both said change needs to come from within Iran and obviously, it does.

And it all ties in with markets and big trades ?