For the last two months, Iran and the United States have carried out fitful, unsuccessful peace negotiations. After striking a very shaky cease-fire agreement at the beginning of April, officials from both countries have traded—and then rejected—long-term proposals. They have announced that they are nearing some kind of deal, and then hit each other with a volley of drones and missiles. “I don’t care if they’re over, honestly,” Trump said on Monday, when asked about the reports that Iran was cutting off talks. The discussions, he declared, had “started to get very boring.”

Tehran and Washington may still reach some kind of agreement in the coming months; neither side’s top leaders seem to be itching for a return to intense combat (although within Iran, some senior officials are). But even if they do reach a deal, [Iran](https://archive.is/o/qdFWx/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/regions/iran) and the United States will remain locked in a broader conflict, trading barbs and perhaps military attacks. That is, in part, because the countries remain far apart on their core disputes. Washington is still demanding that Tehran completely dismantle its nuclear enrichment program, surrender all enriched uranium, end support for regional allies, and reopen the Strait of Hormuz. Iran, however, has repeatedly refused to give up on enrichment. It says it will probably consider Washington’s other demands only after the United States recognizes Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz, compensates Iranians for wartime damages, ends Israel’s war in Lebanon, and unfreezes Iranian assets.

But there is another reason why the sides won’t make real peace: Iran has concluded that conflict is preferable to diplomacy. The war, after all, seems to be helping Tehran increase its international power. By striking Arab states that host American bases, Iran has succeeded in driving a wedge between U.S. officials and their Persian Gulf partners, who desperately want a lasting settlement. By closing the [Strait of Hormuz](https://archive.is/o/qdFWx/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/tags/strait-hormuz), it has forced a collection of countries around the planet to acknowledge its power and negotiate over the fate of their ships. Previous agreements with the United States, meanwhile, have always unraveled.

The Islamic Republic’s strategy, then, is not merely to survive and outlast the [United States](https://archive.is/o/qdFWx/https://www.foreignaffairs.com/regions/united-states), as is commonly assumed. The country is not even really trying to resolve its disputes with Washington. Instead, it wants to fundamentally alter how Tehran is dealt with by the United States, U.S. allies, and indeed, the wider world. It aspires to be a pole in a multipolar order, and it believes that the war is helping it achieve that goal.

# See also:

* [U.S. and Iran Standoff at Sea: A Test of ‘Who Will Blink First’ • The American blockade and Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz have created a stalemate that is neither peace nor raging conflict, with both sides attempting economic strangulation on the water.](https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/28/world/middleeast/iran-us-blockade-strait-hormuz.html) (New York Times)
* [Iran’s New Grand Strategy • How a Remade Islamic Republic Will Reshape the Middle East](https://www.foreignaffairs.com/iran/irans-new-grand-strategy) (Foreign Affairs)
* [Iran war forces farmers to seek fertilizer alternatives from cow dung to compost](https://apnews.com/article/fertilizer-shortage-iran-war-alternatives-farming-60523696dadb80bd6fee43ec27d55f08) (Associated Press)

Iran Embraces a Forever War • Tehran’s New Strategic Calculus