Vance Says U.S.–Iran Talks End With No Agreement After Long Negotiations

Twenty-one hours of marathon diplomacy in Islamabad, Pakistan concluded on Sunday without a breakthrough, as Vice President JD Vance announced that Iran’s delegation had declined to accept American terms for ending the war between the United States, Israel, and Iran. The talks — mediated by Pakistan and described by officials as the highest-level face-to-face meeting between U.S. and Iranian officials since Iran’s 1979 Islamic Revolution — ended in the early hours of Sunday morning, leaving the future of a fragile two-week ceasefire unclear and the broader regional conflict unresolved.

Speaking at a brief news conference following the conclusion of talks, Mr. Vance told reporters that the Iranian side had chosen not to accept the conditions put forward by the American delegation. “They have chosen not to accept our terms,” he said, while stopping short of declaring the negotiations fully collapsed. He indicated that a path to agreement remained theoretically open. “We leave here with a very simple proposal: a method of understanding that is our final and best offer,” Mr. Vance said. “We’ll see if the Iranians accept it.”

The Iranian delegation, for its part, framed the outcome differently. Esmaeil Baqhaei, the spokesman for Iran’s foreign ministry, posted on social media that the discussions in Pakistan “were held on various dimensions of the main negotiation topics, including the Strait of Hormuz, the nuclear issue, war reparations, lifting of sanctions and the complete end to the war against Iran and in the region.” Baqhaei, who was present as part of the Iranian delegation, added that the success of any agreement depended on the United States’ “acceptance of Iran’s legitimate rights and interests.”

In Washington, President Trump projected a markedly different tone earlier in the evening, claiming the outcome was inconsequential to the American position. “We win, regardless,” he told reporters. “We’ve defeated them militarily.” The president did not elaborate on what terms he considered acceptable or what steps might follow the end of the ceasefire period.

Despite the lack of a formal agreement, the meeting itself was widely noted as a significant diplomatic moment. The talks marked the highest-level direct encounter between American and Iranian officials since the 1979 Islamic Revolution severed formal ties between the two nations. Representing Iran was Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, the speaker of Iran’s Parliament, alongside Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. The U.S. delegation was led by Mr. Vance and included Steve Witkoff, the president’s special envoy, and Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law. The sheer duration of the session — stretching past 6 a.m. local time — underscored the seriousness with which both sides approached the encounter, even if no resolution was ultimately reached.

The meeting came roughly six weeks after American and Israeli airstrikes reportedly killed Iran’s supreme leader — a development that prompted Iranian officials to publicly pledge retribution. The willingness of both governments to convene at this level, under Pakistani mediation, was itself seen as a departure from the posture of open hostility that had defined the preceding weeks of conflict.

According to Baqhaei’s public account, the talks covered a broad range of contested topics: the status of the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s nuclear program, the question of war reparations, the lifting of sanctions imposed on Iran, and the terms for a “complete end to the war.” The Strait of Hormuz emerged as a particularly acute flashpoint. The U.S. Defense Department said on Saturday that two American warships had crossed the strait to begin an operation to clear mines from the critical waterway. Iran denied the claim. American officials separately indicated that Iran had been unable to fully reopen the strait in part because it could not locate and remove all of the mines it had laid in the waterway. Only a small number of commercial ships had passed through since the ceasefire took effect.

The nuclear issue has long been at the heart of U.S.–Iran tensions, and Iranian officials have insisted that any lasting settlement must address their rights to nuclear development. Sanctions relief — a priority repeatedly stated by Iranian negotiators — remained among the most contentious points, given Washington’s stated policy of maintaining economic pressure as leverage.

The United States and Iran agreed to a provisional ceasefire on a Tuesday that suspended active fighting for at least two weeks. However, that truce has come under strain. Israel — which was not party to the Islamabad talks — has continued military operations in Lebanon against Hezbollah, the Iran-backed militant group. Iran accused Israel of violating the spirit of the ceasefire through those ongoing strikes, and the situation created additional pressure on American negotiators as they sought to broker a broader peace.

President Trump acknowledged the tension, reportedly asking Israel to scale back its assault. Israeli fighter jets had not attacked Beirut since Wednesday, but Israeli airstrikes continued in southern Lebanon through at least Saturday morning, according to Lebanon’s state media. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Saturday that while Iran’s military had been severely damaged, the war was “not over.”

Diplomatic talks between Lebanon and Israel are separately expected in Washington the following week, with the two countries’ ambassadors to the United States set to meet for direct discussions. However, U.S. officials indicated that a settlement to end the fighting in Lebanon was not expected any time soon.

With the two-week ceasefire window closing and no formal agreement in place, the immediate trajectory of the conflict remains uncertain. Mr. Vance’s framing — that the American offer remained on the table — left open the possibility of further diplomacy, but the terms under which Iran might return to negotiations were not publicly specified. The question of the Strait of Hormuz is likely to remain a pressure point: the waterway is critical to global oil shipments, and both sides have significant interest in its status. American mine-clearing operations, if confirmed, could either be interpreted as a stabilizing step or as a provocation, depending on perspective.

The situation in Lebanon adds a further complicating dimension. Iran has positioned Israel’s ongoing strikes against Hezbollah as a violation of the ceasefire’s intent, while Israel has maintained its right to continue operations against what it describes as an existential threat. The displacement of more than one million Lebanese civilians since the renewed fighting began underscores the humanitarian dimension of a conflict that diplomatic efforts have so far failed to fully arrest.

The Islamabad talks, despite ending without agreement, represented a departure from decades of near-total diplomatic estrangement between Washington and Tehran — a fact that analysts and officials from both sides acknowledged even amid the failure to reach a deal. Whether that opening will be built upon, or whether the expiration of the current ceasefire will return the region to active hostilities, remained an open question as of Sunday morning.