U.S. President Donald Trump said on the 24th (local time) that "Iran gave a gift of tremendous value as a sign of good faith for negotiations." This followed his claim a day earlier that peace talks to completely end the 25-day Middle East conflict were proceeding smoothly, marking a second straight day of conciliatory remarks toward Iran.
But despite showing a conciliatory gesture on the surface, President Trump has continued to deploy additional large-scale troops, including thousands of Marines, across the Middle East, keeping up military pressure without letup. By pairing a show of overwhelming force with behind-the-scenes peace talks, he appears to be pursuing a sophisticated deception strategy to secure an overwhelmingly advantageous position in the coming developments and tighten the noose on Iran.
On the 24th, President Trump told reporters at the White House that "Iran gave a very valuable gift worth a huge amount during the negotiation process." He did not elaborate on exactly what the gift was. He added only that it was "not nuclear but related to oil and gas, to the flow of the (Hormuz) Strait," saying, "It's an incredibly valuable gift, and you will soon find out what it is."
He also emphasized that "Iran agreed to conditions to give up nuclear weapons and uranium holdings," and that both sides were eager for a deal. He even floated a vision that, if a final agreement is reached, the United States and Iran could jointly control the Strait of Hormuz. He went on to declare victory, saying, "The United States won this war."
On the ground at the strait, the epicenter of the conflict, signs of a positive easing are emerging as the military blockade has loosened somewhat. Iran's Tasnim news agency reported that a Thailand-flagged vessel passed through the vital strait safely and without interference on the morning of the 24th. Iran had responded to the all-out military offensive by the United States and Israel by asserting full control of the strait and allowing passage only to its own and friendly nations' ships on a limited basis.
Major foreign outlets analyzed the allowed passage of the merchant ship as the gift Trump referred to and a conciliatory step in which Iran indirectly signaled its willingness to negotiate first. Inside Iran, deaths from the latest airstrikes have surpassed 1,500. With key national infrastructure being destroyed one after another, material and human losses are spiraling out of control. Voices from moderates arguing that a compromise must be found to avert further catastrophe are gaining strength.
Still, military tensions that could escalate into a full-scale war remain taut. Even as he offered an optimistic outlook for talks, President Trump rapidly reinforced forces, urgently moving heavily armed Marine units and 3,000 troops from the 82nd Airborne Division to areas near the Strait of Hormuz.
Since his prior term, President Trump has displayed a distinctive diplomacy that frequently swings between pressure and inducements toward both allies and adversaries. Earlier, he had issued a chilling ultimatum that he would completely destroy Iran's core energy facilities if the strait was not opened. Only after high-level talks with the Iranian side did he extend the attack deadline by five days. The Iranian government is officially denying that talks are taking place at all. But behind the scenes, under the mediation of Egypt, Pakistan, and Türkiye, U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff and Iran's Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi are actively engaging in indirect talks.
The international community and Middle East experts are watching closely to see what fallout will result from the Trump administration's combined hard-and-soft approach that pairs brinkmanship with moderation. Danny Citrinowicz, former Iran Director at Israel's Military Intelligence Directorate, said on social media that "Trump backed off first because the U.S. leadership clearly understood that an overzealous strike on Iran's core energy infrastructure would trigger direct and significant retaliation in a chain reaction."
Charles Kupchan, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations, urged a diplomatic solution, saying, "The U.S. administration must lower its strategic aims from an unrealistic regime overthrow to rigorous containment and gradual reform to reduce the risks of unintended escalation and loss of control over the conflict."