Pentagon Warns of Strike Resumption as Trump Holds Back on Iran Nuclear Deal

The United States has signalled it is prepared to resume full-scale military operations against Iran, as President Donald Trump hesitated to approve a tentative framework for a lasting ceasefire. Speaking at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore on Saturday, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth declared that American forces were “more than capable” of restarting the war, adding that stockpiles were “more than suited” for such a campaign. The Pentagon’s assertive posture came as Trump, after a White House Situation Room meeting, stopped short of endorsing a deal that would extend the fragile truce of early April by 60 days. Central Command (CENTCOM) reinforced the message, stating its troops remained “present and vigilant across the region.” The mixed signals – diplomatic patience coupled with overt military threats – have deepened uncertainty among allies and adversaries alike.

Negotiations have been stuck for weeks over what Washington terms its “red lines.” Central among these is the demand that Iran verifiably abandon any pursuit of nuclear weapons, dismantle its enrichment programme, and destroy existing stockpiles of enriched uranium. A draft framework under consideration would grant negotiators a two-month extension, but it remains conditional on Tehran severing support for allied militias such as Hezbollah and accepting limits on its missile development. From the Iranian perspective, as relayed through indirect channels, there is no final agreement on the table; ending the ongoing hostilities is the immediate priority. Tehran has also linked any settlement to the release of frozen assets and guarantees over navigation through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital choke point for global energy supplies. This multidimensional standoff contrasts with the narrower focus on nuclear issues that dominates Western discourse.

Diplomatic efforts were shaken this week by the worst outbreak of violence since the April 8 truce came into effect. US forces carried out strikes on the Iranian port of Bandar Abbas, prompting retaliatory actions that raised fears of an escalatory spiral. These exchanges have eroded the already thin trust built during indirect talks, which were channelled through intermediaries in Oman. Viewed from Washington, the military operation was a necessary show of resolve after weeks of perceived Iranian stalling; from Tehran, it amounted to negotiating under bombardment. Arab capitals, long anxious about a drift toward full-scale conflict, have urged restraint, warning that the region cannot withstand another major war disrupting oil exports and stoking extremism.

As defence ministers gathered in Singapore, Asian powers expressed growing unease over the potential spillover. Hegseth assured partners that the United States had not shifted focus from the Indo-Pacific, yet the spectre of a rekindled Middle Eastern war complicates Washington’s force posture and strategic bandwidth. European diplomats, monitoring the talks from afar, view a breakdown as a direct threat to maritime security and the nuclear non-proliferation regime. The proposed 60-day extension represents a narrow window – not only for bridging the substantial gaps between the parties, but also for containing the centrifugal forces that could draw in other state and non-state actors.

The road ahead is perilously narrow. Trump’s desire for a “grand deal” that would cement his foreign policy legacy must contend with an Iranian leadership that feels increasingly cornered. If the current diplomatic push collapses, the military option outlined by Hegseth may quickly move from rhetorical warning to operational reality. For now, both sides are testing the limits of brinkmanship, but the chance of miscalculation grows with each round of abandoned talks and each exchange of fire.