Iran, alleging U.S. violations of the accord, has reimposed a blockade on the Strait of Hormuz, shaking the truce from the outset. Even so, both sides appear intent on proceeding as planned with their first face-to-face talks on the 11th (local time) in Islamabad, Pakistan. The United States in particular is investing in the talks by dispatching Vice President J D Vance, a ‘war skeptic’ favored by Iran as a negotiating counterpart.

However, they have failed to narrow differences on core issues such as uranium enrichment and tolls for passage through Hormuz, and they are giving conflicting accounts of the ceasefire terms, creating a precarious situation in which not only an end to the war but even the truce itself could collapse at any moment.

White House Spokesperson Karoline Leavitt said at a briefing on the 8th, “President Trump will dispatch Vice President Vance along with Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and a negotiating team led by Jared Kushner (the eldest son-in-law) to Islamabad.” She added, “Vance, as U.S. Vice President and the president’s right hand, has played a very important role in this issue from the start.”

Vance, who will lead the delegation, told reporters that “we have more points of agreement than differences,” adding, “the more they are willing to give us, the more they will get out of this negotiation.” He also warned, “If Iran breaks the deal, it will face severe consequences.”

Yet from the day after the ceasefire was agreed, the U.S. and Iran have been making diametrically opposed claims on the same issues, and it is unclear what end-of-war demands are even serving as the starting point for talks. President Trump said the previous day, “We received a 10-point proposal from Iran, and I consider it a workable basis for negotiations.” Leavitt, however, said, “The original 10 points Iran put forward were unacceptable and were literally tossed in the trash,” adding, “As the ultimatum deadline loomed, they presented a more reasonable, entirely different, and streamlined plan, and we judged the new revision to be a viable foundation for talks.”

Iran’s position is entirely different. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the head of Iran’s negotiating team and speaker of parliament, said in a statement posted on social media that “the United States violated three of the 10 points,” citing the continued attacks on Lebanon, drone incursions into Iranian airspace, and denial of Iran’s right to enrich uranium. Iran had earlier claimed that, in agreeing to the truce, the United States accepted 10 points including halting attacks on Iran, allowing control over the Strait of Hormuz, recognizing Iran’s right to enrich uranium, lifting first- and second-round sanctions, paying compensation, and stopping the fighting in Lebanon.

In fact, the AP reported the previous day, citing Gulf sources, that the draft ceasefire plan included allowing Iran and Oman to collect passage tolls even during the truce. Pakistan, the mediator, confirmed that a halt to attacks on Lebanon was included as a ceasefire condition.

Vance, however, said, “Iran is mistaken in thinking that the halt to attacks on Lebanon was included in the truce,” adding, “I wonder if they fully understand English.” Leavitt said, “President Trump stated that the truce was reached on the condition of a ‘complete, immediate, and secure opening,’ and since that is clear language, it should be taken at face value,” asserting that allowing tolls as a ceasefire condition was not true.

On uranium enrichment as well, the two sides remain on parallel tracks. Leavitt said, “President Trump’s red line is an end to Iran’s uranium enrichment,” adding, “we will not only ban enrichment, but we will also take possession of all 440㎏ of highly enriched uranium (that Iran has stockpiled).” She added, “Iran has at times indicated a willingness to hand it over.”

President Trump also wrote on social media, “(Iran’s) uranium enrichment will no longer take place, and B-2 bombers will dig out and remove even deeply buried nuclear assets.”

With Washington and Tehran failing to find common ground, experts are skeptical that these talks will bring substantive change. Steven A. Cook, senior fellow for the Middle East and Africa at the Council on Foreign Relations, said, “There has been no regime change in Iran, the current leadership can hardly be considered less radical than before, and Iran still has the capability to threaten its neighbors. On top of that, it has gained a Hormuz leverage it did not have before the war,” adding, “I do not see negotiations changing these realities.”

President Trump warned that if no agreement is reached, he would immediately resort to military action. He said, “The prohibition of nuclear weapons was agreed a long time ago, and Hormuz will remain safely open,” adding, “Though the odds are low, if for any reason the agreement is not carried out, then ‘fire’ will commence immediately in a larger and more powerful way than anyone has ever seen.”