The US and Iran have not reached a deal. Why is this important?

The United States and Iran did not agree on ending the war at the talks in Pakistan. U.S. Vice President Jay Dee Vance said the sides had exchanged views, but Tehran had not accepted the terms offered. The main reason for the disagreement is the lack of guarantees that Iran will abandon the development of nuclear weapons. What the lack of agreements may lead to is described in the Izvestia article.

Reasons for the failure of negotiations

• The United States and Iran began a dialogue after exchanging harsh conditions: Washington proposed 15 demands, and Tehran — 10, while both sides declare victory, although there is no agreement on key issues. The main disagreements relate to the nuclear program, sanctions, military presence and control over important routes.

• The United States demands the complete dismantling of the nuclear infrastructure, the limitation of missiles and the cessation of support for allied groups, offering in return a partial lifting of sanctions under strict control. Iran, in turn, insists on security guarantees, the complete lifting of restrictions, maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz and the right to develop a nuclear program, and also demands the withdrawal of American troops, which makes compromise extremely difficult.

• It is the nuclear issue that remains the most important for Washington in the framework of negotiations with Iran. The administration of US President Donald Trump is committed to preventing Iran from acquiring such weapons either now or in the future. Trump himself said that the outcome of the negotiations was not important to him, since the United States already considered itself the winners in this conflict. He also claims that American forces have inflicted serious damage on the Iranian army and are ensuring the safety of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz.

Israel emerged as the loser of the war with Iran. And here's why

• The talks took place with the participation of the United States, Iran and Pakistan after the decrease in the intensity of strikes in the region and touched upon many topics, including the lifting of sanctions and control over the Strait of Hormuz. Disagreements over this strategic route have also become one of the main reasons for the impasse: Tehran wants to maintain control and charge fees for the passage of ships.

• Previously, about 20% of the world's oil passed through the Strait of Hormuz, but now the flow has sharply decreased — only 18 vessels instead of about 140 per day. Iran attributes the restrictions on shipping to the ongoing strikes on Lebanon, where Hezbollah operates. Israel, in turn, is intensifying attacks, which complicates attempts to achieve a sustainable truce.

Scaling up the conflict

• The main confrontation is between the United States and Iran, but the strikes also affect other states in the region where American bases are located — for example, attacks were recorded in the UAE, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait and Jordan (we wrote more about possible participants in the conflict here). European countries are beginning to announce their possible participation, but there is no unified position.

• The failure of negotiations creates the risk that the conflict may reach a new level. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates are increasing US support in the confrontation with Iran, because it is beneficial for them to prolong the conflict (we wrote more about the interest of the Persian Gulf countries in continuing the conflict here). They also allow their armies to participate in combat operations. So far, we are talking about indirect assistance: the provision of military facilities and pressure on the economy of Tehran.

Pakistan played an unexpected role in the U.S.-Iran truce. Analysis

• Representatives of Saudi Arabia emphasize that they are not ready to tolerate Iran's actions indefinitely and consider the opinion of the weakness of the countries of the region to be erroneous. The UAE is acting more cautiously: they have focused on economic measures, including threats to freeze billions of dollars in assets and close Iranian structures in Dubai. At the same time, Abu Dhabi also does not rule out the option of switching to military involvement if the situation develops further.

Economic and migration consequences

• The US military operation against Iran has greatly affected oil and financial markets, so now the economy is putting pressure on the decisions of the White House. Donald Trump is forced to smooth out the consequences of his own steps and reassure investors, because sharp fluctuations cause discontent within the country (we wrote about the growing discontent of financial players in this article).

• At the same time, Europe is approaching a new energy crisis: gas prices have increased by about 53-90% since the end of February and reached a maximum since 2023. Gas reserves in the EU remain low at about 30%, which increases the threat of shortages. Additional pressure is created by expensive logistics (up to $480 thousand per day for tankers) and the reorientation of Russian exports.

• With a prolonged crisis, prices may rise to $1,000—1,500 per thousand cubic meters, and oil to $150 per barrel, which will hit the European economy, while the United States and partly Russia may benefit (we wrote about the new energy crisis here).

Iran ranks third in the world in terms of oil reserves. What you need to know

• In addition, Europe fears a new migration crisis due to the conflict over Iran, recalling the situation in 2015, when more than 1 million people arrived in the EU (read more about preparations for the influx of refugees here). Europe is tightening the rules and introducing a new distribution mechanism. Despite Europe's preparations, prolonged instability and a large number of existing internally displaced persons in the Middle East region remain at risk of a serious crisis.

Why is this important?

• The failure of negotiations between the United States and Iran reinforces several international problems at once. The continuation of the conflict increases the risk of further escalation and the involvement of other countries. This has a direct impact on global energy markets, increases economic pressure on the global community and creates the threat of new crises, including migration ones.