The U.S.–Iran confrontation is in an unsettled phase. While Thursday night saw fewer reported strikes than the previous two days, political statements, military warnings, maritime developments, and diplomatic activity do not point to any clear pivot away from further warfare. There is a strong likelihood for further strikes and military exchanges this weekend.
President Donald Trump announced that the United States had agreed to Iran’s request to continue negotiations, but at the same time declared that the ceasefire is over, apparently referring to previous understandings including the Memorandum of Understanding.
Despite this rhetoric, additional developments suggest that neither Washington nor Tehran currently appears eager to return to a full-scale war. Reuters reported that Qatari negotiators are in Tehran, while Pakistan continues to play a central mediating role. According to Reuters and Axios, these diplomatic efforts are being coordinated with the United States and are aimed at reducing tensions and creating conditions for broader negotiations rather than allowing the conflict to escalate further.
On the military front, the pace of hostilities slowed Thursday evening. Reports from Iran indicated limited explosions near Konarak and Choghadak, while U.S. officials stated that no new American strikes were conducted overnight. Some regional media and online sources have speculated that the incidents may have involved assets or facilities linked to Bahrain or Kuwait. However, these claims remain entirely unverified. Neither government has acknowledged involvement, no independent evidence has emerged to support the allegations, and such participation would be inconsistent with the cautious approach both states have publicly maintained throughout the current crisis.
At the same time, there are also unverified reports citing an Iranian security official suggesting that Israel was responsible for the latest strikes. Israel has neither confirmed nor denied involvement, and major international news organizations have not independently verified the claim.
Iran reportedly retaliated by launching missiles toward U.S.-related targets in the region, causing no reported damage or casualties after interceptions by U.S. and regional air defense systems. Although both sides continue to exchange threats, the scale of military operations has been considerably lower than during the previous two nights.
The central strategic question, however, remains the future of the Strait of Hormuz, the proximate trigger for the ongoing escalation. Recent shipping data suggest that maritime traffic is recovering only gradually and remains well below normal levels. 18 commercial vessels reportedly transited the Strait of Hormuz on July 9, compared with 28 on July 8 and 36 on July 7, underscoring that commercial confidence remains fragile despite the reduction in military activity.
The International Energy Agency (IEA) similarly reported that oil flows through the Strait have begun to recover, contributing to an improvement in global oil demand and supply. Nevertheless, exports from Gulf producers remain significantly below pre-war levels, indicating that energy markets continue to price in substantial geopolitical risk.
Iran, meanwhile, continues to present itself as the principal guarantor of security in the Strait. The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) stated that shipping capacity has recovered to approximately 50 percent of pre-war levels, while emphasizing that vessels are increasingly transiting through routes designated by Iran after receiving authorization from the IRGC Navy. The statement also warned that any foreign attempt to dictate navigation routes would disrupt the gradual reopening process and could trigger further confrontation.
These developments highlight what is now the most important unresolved issue of the crisis: whether Iran will be able to maintain effective operational control over security conditions in the Strait of Hormuz after sustaining significant U.S. military strikes, or whether continued American military pressure will fundamentally reshape the balance of power in one of the world’s most strategically important maritime chokepoints.
Closely related is another unresolved question: whether Iran will resume attacks against commercial shipping. Since the large-scale U.S. strikes earlier this week, no independently confirmed attacks against merchant vessels have been reported. Nevertheless, shipping companies continue to operate cautiously, insurance premiums remain elevated, and vessel traffic remains well below normal levels. The absence of new attacks should therefore not be interpreted as evidence that the maritime crisis has been resolved.
Another notable development is President Trump’s growing emphasis on personal security threats. During funeral ceremonies for Ali Khamenei, chants calling for revenge against Trump attracted considerable attention inside and outside Iran. At the same time, The Wall Street Journal reported that Israel had shared intelligence with Washington concerning an alleged new Iranian plot targeting the U.S. president. Although these reports have not been publicly substantiated, they appear to have reinforced Trump’s harder line on Iran, with the President commenting publicly on the apparent assassination threats and noting that if anything happens to him, Iran will be bombed harder than ever before.
Inside Iran, officials continue to emphasize deterrence rather than compromise. Supreme National Security Council Secretary Mohammad Bagher Zolghadr warned that any attacks on Iranian infrastructure would be met with reciprocal retaliation, while Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reiterated to Pakistan’s Army Chief that Iran remains prepared to defend itself if U.S. attacks continue. The IRGC likewise warned that further American military action could place U.S. bases throughout the region at risk.
Taken together, these developments suggest that the military confrontation may be entering a lower-intensity phase without producing a political settlement. Active diplomacy continues, military exchanges have become more limited, and neither side currently appears to seek a return to unrestricted war. Yet none of the underlying disputes that drove the latest escalation have been resolved. The future security architecture of the Strait of Hormuz, freedom of navigation, Iran’s ability to preserve its influence over the waterway, the credibility of U.S. deterrence, and the durability of ongoing negotiations all remain uncertain. For now, the decline in violence appears to represent a tactical pause rather than a strategic resolution, and the Strait of Hormuz remains the single most important indicator of whether the crisis moves back toward diplomacy or returns to military escalation.