Expert: The More Generous U.S. Ceasefire Terms Are, the More Suspicious Iran Is That It’s a Ruse for Another Attack

(SeaPRwire) –   The Iranian government is questioning whether a potential agreement to prolong its ceasefire with the United States might be too favorable to be genuine.

Although negotiations are ongoing and specific terms remain under discussion, reports from Axios indicate that the proposed framework involves Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz to toll-free maritime traffic. In exchange, the U.S. would terminate its naval blockade of Iranian ports and provide sanctions relief, enabling Tehran to resume international oil sales.

However, critical issues must be resolved during a 60-day negotiation period, including the status of Iran’s uranium stockpiles, the permanent lifting of U.S. sanctions, and the release of approximately $25 billion in frozen Iranian assets.

While the U.S. intends to maintain its regional military presence until a final agreement is solidified, the proposal would require the Trump administration to relinquish significant leverage.

“A major flaw in this strategy—choosing to defer the nuclear issue—is that waiving sanctions on Iranian oil exports now will diminish, rather than bolster, Iran’s incentive to finalize a nuclear deal,” noted Eric Brewer, a former National Security Council director for counterproliferation, on X. “Furthermore, by linking those sanctions to the Strait, you forfeit the ability to reinstate them without risking an Iranian takeover of the waterway.”

News of a potential ceasefire extension has drawn criticism from Republicans, who express concern that the Trump administration may be conceding too much.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) cautioned against any deal that effectively legitimizes Tehran’s control over the strait, arguing it would fundamentally alter the regional balance of power and eventually create a “nightmare” scenario for Israel.

Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) similarly labeled a 60-day extension a disaster, stating, “Everything accomplished by Operation Epic Fury would be for naught!” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) echoed these sentiments.

“If the outcome is an Iranian regime—still led by Islamists chanting ‘death to America’—receiving billions of dollars, gaining the ability to enrich uranium and develop nuclear weapons, and exercising effective control over the Strait of Hormuz, that would be a disastrous mistake,” he wrote on X.

Despite the damage inflicted on Iran’s military and economy by U.S.-Israeli strikes, Tehran has maintained sufficient combat capabilities—including drones, missiles, and fast-attack craft—to keep the Strait of Hormuz obstructed.

Meanwhile, President Trump has shown hesitation toward resuming hostilities or breaking the ceasefire, while also scaling back efforts to secure tanker traffic via Navy escorts.

With Iran leveraging the global economy and oil markets facing potential collapse within weeks, Tehran has remained firm on its primary demands.

Even the Iranian regime remains skeptical of the U.S. proposal, given that previous diplomatic efforts earlier this year and last year concluded with U.S. military strikes.

“The current deal appears to favor Iran. However, Tehran is not convinced it isn’t a precursor to war, either now or in 30 days,” observed Vali Nasr, a former senior State Department adviser, on X. “In fact, the more generous the terms, the greater the suspicion that the U.S. is not committed to peace and is merely attempting to distract Iran before launching another attack.”

Consequently, Tehran will be looking for tangible signs of a U.S. military withdrawal, a move Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei must decide whether to gamble on, he added.

U.S. Marine Corps

A report from the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) on Saturday noted that the Iranian regime views itself as negotiating from a position of strength “due to its victory in the war.”

Furthermore, the ISW stated that securing sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz remains a primary objective for Tehran during these talks.

Meanwhile, the U.S. naval blockade has failed to diminish Iran’s influence, as vessels that avoid Iranian ports remain free to transit, provided they comply with conditions set by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

The international community requires a swift return to normalcy in the strait, but the ISW warned in a separate report that prolonged negotiations serve to normalize Iran’s de facto control.

“The Iranians are likely aware of this, which is why they are stalling and delaying the negotiation process,” the report stated. “The U.S. and the international community should not permit Iran to impose a new reality on this vital waterway. If negotiations do not rapidly result in an agreement to reopen the strait under the previously recognized transit protocols, then resorting to force will unfortunately become necessary.”