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

The Chinese government is authoritarian. It maintains control. It would be easy to mis-step, though possibly not as easy as in North Korea.

I thought you would understand that.

No
Not on the oil subject that I’m aware of
on Taiwan.
Although there is a possibility that one of them ‘gave in’ 🤷‍♀️
No one’s saying now

Sounds very like when he was asked to name his favourite bit of the Bible.

It seems odd that Trump says the PRC will buy US crude. Can US crude go through Chinese refineries ?

Also, why would they need to find a new oil source when Trump repeatedly says it is him who is keeping the SoH closed ? I would have thought that was a gangster move. Shut off one oil supply then offer to sell your own.

And you feel you would misstep if you were to live there ?

There is a lot 'Trump claims' without any details being released.

I am sure he will think up lots more stuff over the next few days.

Right ... they are not saying different things about Xi agreeing to buy US oil.

This is the issue @TopPocketFind and I posted on. After I noted that Trump said Xi has agreed to buy oil from the US, their reaction was Trump thinks China wants to buy US oil.

Top has the feels that China gained more than Trump, but in reality none of us know the details of what the leaders conceded or gained. However, it would be strange for Trump to state that Xi has agreed to buy oil from the US if that was not true because Xi could immediately deny it which he hasn't done.

@Twiglets1 Trump states a lot

It can't be that much of a surprise to think China will have had the upper hand here.

That would only be assumed if you have an anti US viewpoint.

Like if I said - I bet Xi got the shit end of the deal, it would come across as though I was prejudiced against him or the country he represents.

I wouldn't want to make assumptions about which of the leaders gave away more concessions, even phrasing it like that is negative. Surely it's a good thing for the US and China to build better diplomatic relations and to respect each other, rather than framing it as one side has the "upper hand".

Anti US view point?

As in not believing everything Trump says?

As in assuming with absolutely no evidence either way that China will have the upper hand over the US in negotiations.

Does anyone believe anything he says ?

From CNN, he is on his plane:

"Asked by reports aboard Air Force One if Xi made any firm commitment to put pressure on Iran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, Trump said: “I’m not asking for any favors, because when you ask for favors, you have to do favors in return.”"

Art of the deal ?

But he did say he is considering lifting sanctions on PRC companies that buy Iranian oil.

I have my opinion, you have yours.

I dont constantly question or ridicule yours

This is a response to @Twiglets1 The quote options is not working for me at the moment.

I think you are allowing your own views about Trump to affect how you think he is perceived by the whole world ("anyone").

Sure we all know he's a bullshitter and ridiculous person. Nevertheless, it would be incorrect to assume that no one believes a word he says.

Until and unless Xi denies that China is buying US oil, I think many people will assume that to be true. Of course Trump will have had to make concessions too.

I would never assume that no one believes a word he says.

I have seen enough that proves the exact opposite.

I was quoting @RedTagAlan in that post - it was she who said "Does anyone believe anything he says?"

This extract from the bbc

‘ Unresolved fault lines
The war against Iran and the resulting blockade of the Hormuz Strait was a key part of the agenda, and Trump entered the talks hoping for Chinese co-operation on the Iran conflict and the oil market.
Trump has said that China could use its influence to encourage Iran to stabilise flows through the Strait of Hormuz, a key global energy artery.
"[Xi would] like to see the Hormuz Strait open, and said 'if I can be of any help whatsoever, I would like to help,'" Trump told Fox News.
The Chinese foreign ministry was more vague, and released a statement on Friday calling for "a comprehensive and lasting ceasefire".
"Shipping lanes should be reopened as soon as possible in response to the calls of the international community," it added.
Chinese readouts indicated that while the Middle East was discussed, details were limited.’

So with regards to the SOH they don’t seem to be saying the same
China hasnt announced ‘they would help’

And they were quoting me.

Maybe stop policing the thread and we can continue the discussion.

I'm not policing the thread, I'm joining in.

Why are you trying to stop me joining in?

I am not, I am asking you to continue the discussion

@TopPocketFind You were the one who said "I have my opinion, you have yours".
And that "I dont constantly question or ridicule yours"

So why are you now ridiculing my opinions by comparing me to some kind of policewoman for expressing them?

Yeah. I posted:

"Does anyone believe anything he says?"

I did not post :

"Nobody believes anything he says"

Different things. Also, I can't say I see any anti US sentiment on here. I see mostly objective thoughts and opinions. But not from folk who appear to believe what Trump says. I suspect they are related.

Back on subject though. Xi will not be saying anything. He has people that do that for him. And it usually takes a few days. Even then, it will likely be coded.

@RedTagAlan

Like this?

Break the code down for me @TopPocketFind I find it impossible to decipher from your screenshot.

It seems all positive to me!

Yup. I think it is more to do with the layout of what is said, if that makes sense.

So in the state media, the Global times is the best for it, you might have a lead article about the US selling arms to someone. Then a fluffy thing like you posted, then an article on record imports of soy beans from South America.

I think that would mean... stop selling arms to X, there was a chat, and no we are not buying your soy beans.