President Donald Trump’s decision to back off from striking Iran, just hours after threatening to seize the country’s Kharg Island, underscores the dilemma he faces in dealing with Tehran. Mr. Trump, who launched the conflict with his ally Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel on February 28, now wants to end it through talks. But Iran, which survived 40 days of U.S.-Israeli bombing and now controls the Strait of Hormuz, appears unwilling to hand him a diplomatic victory. Caught between an uncontrollable Israel, whose bombing of Lebanon threatens the fragile U.S.-Iran ceasefire, and an emboldened Iran that has become increasingly defiant and intransigent, Mr. Trump reverted to his familiar playbook of using military pressure to alter Tehran’s negotiating position. On Wednesday he ordered strikes on Iran after confirming that a U.S. Apache helicopter had been shot down over the Strait of Hormuz. Iran retaliated by striking U.S. bases in Kuwait, Bahrain and Jordan. After two nights of tit-for-tat strikes, Mr. Trump backed off on Thursday, claiming progress in talks. Over the past two months, he has claimed dozens of times that a deal with Iran was within reach. In the war’s escalation cycle, Mr. Trump takes one step forward, two steps back.

When Mr. Trump despatched his “armada” to Iran’s shores in February, he wanted to force Tehran into submission through military pressure. The U.S. and Israel had an ambitious list of demands, including dismantling Iran’s nuclear programme, degrading its missile capabilities and ending its support for non-state militias. When the U.S. and Israel launched the war, they wanted regime change in Tehran. More than three months later, the war, which failed to achieve any of its declared objectives, has hardened Iran’s positions. If Iran was willing to make concessions on its nuclear programme on February 27, it now insists that any discussion on the nuclear file can take place only after the U.S.-Israeli hostilities cease and the blockade is lifted. The war has fundamentally altered the strategic reality of the region. Yes, Iran has absorbed significant military and economic costs, but it has emerged strategically stronger by taking control of the Hormuz Strait and effectively trapping the U.S. in a costly stalemate. Rather than chasing a delusional Iranian surrender, Washington should adopt a phased, realistic diplomatic approach. The priority should be to enforce and extend the ceasefire in good faith and lift the blockade in exchange for Iran reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Once stability is restored, both sides can return to substantive talks on Iran’s nuclear programme and work towards a durable end to the conflict.

Donald Trump’s decision to postpone attacks on Iran’s power plants, 36 hours after issuing a 48-hour ultimatum to Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, is the clearest sign yet that the war is not going according to his plan. Over the past week, Mr. Trump has declared victory, claiming that U.S. and Israeli strikes had destroyed Iran’s defence capabilities. Yet, Iran continues to launch missiles at Persian Gulf countries and Israel, while maintaining control over the Strait of Hormuz, which prevents Mr. Trump from extricating himself from a conflict whose economic costs are mounting globally. Since the war began on February 28, Iran has largely ignored Mr. Trump’s threats, responding to escalation with counter-escalation. When the U.S. bombed Kharg Island, Iran struck American bases in the region. When Israel targeted South Pars, Iran hit energy facilities across Qatar, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Israel. After the Natanz nuclear facility was struck, Tehran targeted Dimona, the Israeli town hosting its nuclear facilities. When Mr. Trump threatened strikes on Iran’s power plants, Tehran warned of attacks on Gulf and Israeli energy assets and U.S. financial interests, forcing him to make a U-turn.

Before the war began, the U.S. and Israel had set ambitious objectives: force Tehran to shut down its nuclear programme and ship out the highly enriched uranium, cut off Iran’s support for non-state militias in West Asia and dismantle its missile capabilities. Twenty-five days later, one of Mr. Trump’s key priorities is to open the Strait of Hormuz, which was closed only after the war broke out. He does not have easy options to do so — he has to either talk to Tehran and make a deal or authorise a ground operation; reports suggest the U.S. has already despatched thousands of marines. Yet, Mr. Trump’s U-turn on strikes on power plants indicates that he may be seriously weighing talks. Iran has dismissed Mr. Trump’s claims that negotiations are underway. But President Masoud Pezeshkian has outlined conditions for ending the war: guarantees against future aggression; reparations for infrastructure damage; and recognition of Iran’s ‘legitimate rights’ (which can be interpreted as sanctions relief). Mr. Trump, whose administration has already eased some sanctions on Iran’s oil, could be looking for a deal, and Tehran could reciprocate if common ground is found. But for any diplomatic effort to progress, Mr. Trump must first rein in his ally Israel, which continues to pound Iran and Lebanon like an unhinged bully. The military path that he has embraced is showing clear limits. The least damaging way out for Mr. Trump is to strike a deal with Iran and get out of this war.