Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
Iran Conflict 2026
7AUG

Iran's fourth ceasefire text on 1 May

3 min read
12:08UTC

Tehran handed Pakistani mediators a fourth ceasefire text on 1 May offering Hormuz reopening for an end to the US blockade, with nuclear talks deferred to a post-war phase.

ConflictDeveloping
Key takeaway

A fourth proposal restating Hormuz-first, nuclear-last sequencing reaches Washington via Islamabad.

Iran delivered a fourth ceasefire text to Pakistan on Friday 1 May; Pakistani officials confirmed forwarding it to Washington the same afternoon 1. The proposal reportedly mirrors the two-phase structure Tehran put forward on 28 April , offering Hormuz reopening and a halt to attacks on shipping in exchange for the United States lifting the Hormuz blockade and ending the war, with nuclear talks deferred to a phase that would only begin once the war is formally over.

Pakistan has been the operational back-channel for every Iranian proposal of the war, which makes its role here mechanical rather than diplomatic: Islamabad receives Tehran's text and walks it across to Washington, without amending the terms. Sequencing remains the substantive sticking point. Iran wants the blockade lifted and the war declared ended before the nuclear file is reopened; Trump's public position requires the nuclear file resolved first. The two demands cannot both be the precondition for the same conversation.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asked Washington to drop its 'threatening rhetoric' and 'expansionist approach' after delivery. Mojtaba Khamenei, who succeeded his father as Supreme Leader in March, restated that foreign forces have no place in the Persian Gulf 'except the depths of its waters' . Both statements are maximalist openings rather than negotiating signals; the structural concession is the offer to reopen the strait at all, given the toll regime Tehran codified into domestic law in March.

The text has not been published. Whether the 1 May iteration moves on enrichment duration, monitoring architecture or sequencing, in any way the prior three did not, will not be establishable from open sources until Tehran or Washington chooses to release it. The market read of the proposal, captured in Brent's same-session move, is the next event.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

Pakistan has been acting as a go-between in this conflict, carrying messages between Iran and the United States because the two countries have no direct diplomatic channel. On 1 May, Iran sent its fourth proposed ceasefire deal through Pakistan, offering to reopen the Strait of Hormuz in exchange for the US ending its military blockade, with nuclear talks saved for a later phase. Both sides disagreed on the order of steps. Iran wants the Hormuz situation resolved first, then nuclear talks. The US wants nuclear commitments first, then Hormuz. Both sides are using the other issue as leverage, which is why the fourth proposal (like the first three) did not lead to a deal.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

Pakistan's mediating role rests on a structural constraint: it is the only channel with civilian and IRGC buy-in on the Iranian side. Araghchi speaks for Pezeshkian's civilian government; Mojtaba Khamenei speaks for the IRGC-backed Supreme Leader office.

When both restate maximum positions after delivery of the fourth text, it signals that the document's submission does not represent a unified Iranian position, and that Pakistan is forwarding a proposal whose internal contradictions have not been resolved.

The Hormuz-last demand from Washington traces to Rubio's public framing in late April: the US will not allow Hormuz reopening to remove Iran's primary negotiating leverage before the nuclear question is resolved.

Iran's sequential demand inverts this: Tehran will not allow the nuclear programme (described by Mojtaba as a national asset that '90 million Iranians will protect') to be addressed while the country is under active military blockade. Each side's sequencing demand is a leverage-preservation mechanism, not a genuine procedural preference.

What could happen next?
  • Consequence

    With four consecutive ceasefire failures following the same sequencing structure, the probability of a breakthrough before the 11 May Murkowski AUMF deadline is low absent a new mediating framework or changed battlefield conditions.

  • Risk

    Pakistan's continued forwarding of proposals both sides reject publicly risks reducing Islamabad's credibility as a neutral channel, making subsequent rounds harder to construct on the same framework.

First Reported In

Update #86 · Trump signs paper. The paper ends the war.

Al Jazeera· 2 May 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
Turkiye
Turkiye
Erdogan followed the Pakistani delegation to Jeddah for an instrument that has not been signed. Ankara's entry widens Saudi Arabia's defence architecture beyond the existing Pakistan pact, adding a second non-Gulf military partner mid-conflict.
Oman
Oman
Muscat is the corridor's broker but has published nothing about the arrangement Fars describes on its behalf. The account leaves Oman administering outbound traffic only, a narrower role than the shared route its mediation has rested on since 1979.
Pakistan
Pakistan
Islamabad sent Sharif, Munir and Dar to Jeddah to widen a defence commitment it has honoured in cheaper registers since March, when Dar invoked the Saudi mutual defence pact. Jeddah tests whether that hedge becomes a binding trilateral instrument with Turkiye.
United States
United States
Washington rejected the Majlis Hormuz bill outright while CENTCOM's own tally kept climbing to 49 vessels redirected since 14 July. Both instruments tightened in the same week Trump promised the strait would reopen soon.
Iran
Iran
Iran's foreign ministry is selling a phased Hormuz corridor through Oman and denying any percentage cargo tariff, while its own Majlis is legislating fines to 20% and a bar on Israeli-linked cargo. The two accounts, from the same government, do not agree with each other.
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia
Riyadh published a target forecast, not an attribution, for the campaign it says the Najran strike previewed. That keeps an Article 51 case available while it formalises a trilateral defence architecture with Pakistan and Turkiye.