Will Trump accept Iran’s new 14-point peace plan to end the conflict?

Iran has presented a detailed 14-point proposal aimed at bringing a definitive end to the ongoing conflict in West Asia.

While the proposal signals Tehran's willingness to pursue a structured peace, early reactions from US President Donald Trump indicate that Washington remains unconvinced.

The US president has acknowledged reviewing the outline of the offer but has simultaneously questioned whether it meets American expectations, particularly on issues related to Iran’s nuclear programme and regional conduct.

Despite a halt in large-scale military operations, both sides continue to engage in maritime confrontations in the strategically critical Strait of Hormuz.

What is Tehran’s 14-point proposal?

Iran’s newly submitted framework marks its most expansive attempt yet to resolve the conflict.

Unlike earlier initiatives that focused primarily on temporary halts in hostilities, this proposal seeks to address the underlying causes of the confrontation within a defined timeline of 30 days.

More from Explainers

Is Israel the only disruptor in West Asia?

Trump’s backing has made Asim Munir more dangerous, India must play its cards well

According to Iranian sources, the 14-point plan was crafted in response to a US-backed nine-point proposal that focused on extending the truce rather than ending the conflict outright.

Central to Tehran’s demands is a commitment from Washington and its allies to refrain from future military action against Iran. This request reflects long-standing concerns in Tehran over repeated attacks, including strikes carried out by the US and Israel, as well as covert operations targeting Iranian nuclear infrastructure and personnel.

The proposal also calls for the withdrawal of US military forces from areas surrounding Iran, a measure Tehran views as essential for reducing the risk of renewed escalation.

Alongside this, Iran is seeking the removal of economic sanctions that have significantly impacted its economy over decades. The plan includes provisions for the release of Iranian assets frozen abroad, amounting to billions of dollars.

Another key element is the demand for financial compensation for damages incurred during the conflict. Iran has also proposed a cessation of hostilities across all theatres, extending beyond its own territory to include regions such as Lebanon.

Tehran has also suggested establishing a new mechanism to regulate navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.

Iran has further insisted on the recognition of its right to uranium enrichment as a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. However, in an apparent attempt to facilitate progress on broader issues, Tehran has indicated that discussions on its nuclear programme could be deferred until after a comprehensive peace agreement is reached.

Following the submission of the proposal, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi stated, “Now the ball is in the United States’ court to choose the path of diplomacy or the continuation of a confrontational approach.”

How did Trump respond?

Trump has confirmed that he has been briefed on the general contours of the plan but has expressed doubts about its acceptability. “If they do something bad, there is a possibility it could happen,” Trump said when asked whether military strikes might resume.

In remarks posted later, he questioned whether Iran had faced sufficient consequences for its past actions, stating that it was difficult to envision accepting a proposal from a country that had “not yet paid a big enough price for what they have done to Humanity, and the World, over the last 47 years”.

At the core of Washington’s reservations is Iran’s nuclear programme. The US has consistently maintained that any agreement must include stringent restrictions on Tehran’s nuclear activities.

American proposals have called for the dismantling of key facilities, including those at Natanz, Isfahan, and Fordow, as well as the transfer of enriched uranium stockpiles to international oversight bodies.

The demand for immediate and comprehensive nuclear concessions contrasts sharply with Iran’s position that such issues should be addressed at a later stage.

Another major concern for Washington is the situation in the Strait of Hormuz. The US has insisted that Iran end its effective blockade of the waterway, which has disrupted global shipping and energy flows.

Tehran’s actions in the strait were initially framed as a response to military operations conducted by the US and Israel earlier in the conflict.

Despite the ceasefire, maritime tensions have persisted, with both sides continuing to intercept, detain, or engage vessels linked to the other.

How many peace proposals have surfaced?

The current diplomatic impasse is the result of a series of competing proposals exchanged over the past several weeks. In late March, the US presented a 15-point plan that outlined a pathway toward de-escalation.

That proposal included a one-month ceasefire period during which negotiations would take place, alongside demands for extensive nuclear concessions from Iran.

These included dismantling critical nuclear infrastructure, committing to a permanent ban on nuclear weapons development, and allowing comprehensive inspections by international agencies.

Iran rejected that proposal, arguing that a temporary ceasefire would provide an opportunity for its adversaries to regroup and launch further attacks.

In response, Tehran introduced a 10-point plan on April 7, which highlighted a broader regional de-escalation, including safe navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, lifting of sanctions, and reconstruction efforts.

Trump described the Iranian proposal as a “significant proposal” but concluded that it fell short of US expectations.

Subsequently, a ceasefire was agreed upon on April 8, marking a pause in active hostilities. However, efforts to translate this truce into a lasting agreement have so far been unsuccessful.

The US later advanced a nine-point framework that focused on extending the ceasefire rather than resolving the conflict in its entirety. Iran’s latest 14-point proposal represents a shift toward seeking a definitive settlement, though it remains at odds with key US demands.

What has Iran said about any continued hostilities?

Although large-scale military operations have been suspended since early April, the situation remains far from stable. Both sides have continued to engage in actions that undermine the ceasefire, particularly in the maritime domain.

The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps has stated that it remains on “full standby” for a potential resumption of hostilities, citing concerns about US intentions and past treaty violations.

In a message posted on social media, the IRGC’s intelligence arm suggested that Washington faces a narrowing set of choices, stating, “There is only one way to read this: Trump must choose between an impossible military operation or a bad deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran. The room for US decision-making has narrowed.”

The ongoing naval confrontation has been particularly significant. Iran’s closure of the Strait of Hormuz has disrupted the movement of commercial vessels, with hundreds of ships and tens of thousands of seafarers stranded in the region.

According to the International Maritime Organization, the scale of disruption has been substantial, affecting global supply chains and energy markets.

Reports of incidents in the strait continue to emerge. A tanker was recently struck by unidentified projectiles near the coast of the United Arab Emirates, though no casualties were reported.

What is the US doing now in the Iran war?

In response to the ongoing disruption, the US has initiated a large-scale operation aimed at restoring freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. The effort involves significant military resources, including thousands of personnel, aircraft, naval vessels, and drones.

According to the United States Central Command, the mission is designed to support commercial shipping while maintaining pressure on Iran through existing blockades.

The operation combines military coordination with diplomatic outreach to other countries, as Washington seeks to build an international coalition.

US Admiral Brad Cooper stated, “Our support for this defensive mission is essential to regional security and the global economy as we also maintain the naval blockade,”.

Trump outlined the objective of the operation in a public statement, saying, “We have told these Countries that we will guide their Ships safely out of these restricted Waterways, so that they can freely and ably get on with their business.”

At the same time, he issued a warning that any attempts to interfere with the operation would be met with a strong response.

The US has also explored the creation of a broader maritime coalition, referred to as the Maritime Freedom Construct, which would focus on intelligence sharing, diplomatic coordination, and enforcement of sanctions to manage shipping in the region.

What next?

The ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz has had far-reaching economic implications. The disruption of a key global energy corridor has contributed to rising oil and gas prices, placing additional pressure on economies worldwide.

In the United States, the impact has been felt in the form of higher fuel prices, adding to domestic political challenges for the Trump administration. With congressional elections approaching, the issue has taken on added significance, as voters respond to the economic consequences of the conflict.

Trump has also made controversial remarks regarding the US naval blockade.

“We took over the cargo. Took over the oil, a very profitable business. Who would have thought, we’re sort of like pirates, but we’re not playing games,” he said during an event in Florida.

Iran’s Foreign Ministry responded by characterising these comments as a “damning admission of piracy.”

Despite the challenges, diplomatic channels remain open. Iran has confirmed that it has received a response from the United States to its latest proposal and is currently reviewing it.

However, details of the US reply have not been publicly disclosed, and there has been no immediate confirmation from Washington or Islamabad.

“At this stage, we do not have nuclear negotiations,” said Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei.

With inputs from agencies