What to expect from US-Iran ceasefire talks in Pakistan: Nukes, sanctions and Hormuz on the table

As the United States and Iran prepare for high-stakes negotiations in Islamabad, the fragile two-week ceasefire has created a narrow diplomatic window—but not necessarily a pathway—to peace. With both sides entering talks from sharply divergent positions, the discussions are expected to be tense, complex and potentially decisive for the trajectory of the conflict.

The ceasefire talks will take place in Islamabad on Saturday, 11 April.

Who is going to US-Iran ceasefire talks in Islamabad?

The Islamabad meeting, expected to begin on Saturday, will mark the first direct, in-person engagement between Washington DC and Tehran since the outbreak of hostilities.

Pakistan, which played a central role in brokering the ceasefire, is positioning itself as a key intermediary in what could become a defining geopolitical negotiation. Tehran has confirmed its participation, while the White House has indicated that discussions are under consideration, though not formally finalised.

Senior officials suggest that Vice President JD Vance is likely to lead the US delegation, signalling the importance Washington attaches to the talks. Iran is expected to be represented by senior diplomatic figures, including its foreign minister.

Iran’s ISNA news agency reported that Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf is set to lead Tehran’s negotiating team in talks in Islamabad with US Vice President JD Vance, while a separate report from Tasnim, citing an official, said that a final decision on the head of Iran’s negotiating delegation has not yet been made.

What will be on the table?

At the core of the negotiations lies Iran’s sweeping 10-point proposal, which President Donald Trump has described as “a workable basis on which to negotiate”.

The framework includes demands long rejected by Washington, including:

• Lifting all primary and secondary sanctions
• Withdrawal of US forces from the Middle East
• Continued Iranian control over the Strait of Hormuz
• Release of frozen Iranian assets
• Binding guarantees through a UN Security Council resolution

These proposals are expected to form the foundation of the discussions, though significant revisions are likely to be required for any agreement to materialise.

The nuclear question

The most contentious issue is likely to be Iran’s insistence on retaining uranium enrichment capabilities.

While a potential agreement may involve commitments not to pursue nuclear weapons in exchange for sanctions relief, Tehran’s demand for recognition of its enrichment programme remains a red line for the US and its allies.

This fundamental disagreement reflects a deeper divide: Iran frames enrichment as a sovereign right, whereas Washington views it as a proliferation risk requiring strict limitation.

Strait of Hormuz debate

Control over the Strait of Hormuz is expected to be another major flashpoint in the talks.

Iran has indicated that maritime passage during the ceasefire will be coordinated by its military, raising concerns about long-term authority over a waterway critical to global energy flows.

The proposal also includes provisions allowing Iran and Oman to impose transit fees of up to $2 million per vessel, with revenues directed towards reconstruction.

Should negotiations collapse, Tehran has signalled it could once again restrict access to the strait, underscoring its leverage.

What Iran expects

Tehran is entering negotiations from a position it portrays as strength, presenting the ceasefire as a strategic success rather than a concession.

Iran’s leadership has made clear that the talks will proceed strictly within the framework of its 10-point plan, with limited room for compromise.

“It is emphasized that this does not signify the termination of the war. Our hands remain upon the trigger, and should the slightest error be committed by the enemy, it shall be met with full force.”

This posture suggests that Iran will seek not only sanctions relief and security guarantees, but also broader recognition of its regional and strategic interests.

What the US wants

Washington’s objectives are expected to centre on de-escalation without conceding core security concerns.

The US is likely to push for:

• Guaranteed freedom of navigation through the Strait of Hormuz
• Constraints on Iran’s nuclear programme
• Regional de-escalation, including limits on attacks by allied groups
• A framework that avoids granting Iran expanded strategic control

At the same time, domestic political considerations—including Congressional scrutiny—may limit the extent of concessions the administration can offer.

A narrow window for diplomacy

The two-week ceasefire provides only a limited timeframe for progress, though it may be extended by mutual agreement.

Analysts broadly expect that Iran’s maximalist demands will serve as an opening position rather than a final settlement. The negotiations are therefore likely to focus on identifying areas of incremental compromise rather than achieving a comprehensive agreement immediately.

What role will Pakistan play next?

Pakistan Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said he would welcome US and Iranian delegations to the capital from 10 April.

"Iran will feel more comfortable in Islamabad, which is why it accepted Pakistan's mediation," AFP quoted Asif Ali Khan Durrani, the former Pakistani ambassador to Iran, adding Pakistan could help the two sides resolve outstanding differences.

If talks were direct, "then Pakistan may help the parties to fine-tune the language if there is a stalemate", he said, adding that Pakistan officials could also act as the go-between if the two sides would not meet face-to-face.

Pakistan does not formally recognise Israel, which said on Wednesday it supported Trump's decision to suspend bombing, but that the two-week ceasefire did not include Lebanon where it has carried out ground and aerial operations against Iran-backed Hezbollah.

That contradicted Sharif's earlier statement that the ceasefire covered "everywhere including Lebanon".