President Donald Trump announced Thursday that he had canceled a planned large-scale military strike against Iran, claiming that Washington and Tehran had reached a significant diplomatic breakthrough that could pave the way for a formal agreement to ease tensions in the Middle East.
Trump made the announcement on his Truth Social platform as the opening ceremony of the 2026 FIFA World Cup was taking place in Mexico, surprising markets that had been bracing for another escalation in the conflict between the United States and Iran.
The statement immediately fueled a rally in global equity markets while international oil prices fell sharply, reflecting investor optimism that reduced tensions could eventually allow greater stability in Gulf energy exports.
“Based on the fact that discussions with the Islamic Republic of Iran have been brought to the highest level of Iranian leadership and approved, I am canceling the strike and bombing scheduled against Iran tonight,” Trump wrote.
The Republican president also claimed that the principal elements of a broader agreement had already been accepted by the United States and its regional allies, including Israel.
“The time and place of the signing will be announced soon,” Trump said.
Despite Trump’s optimistic tone, officials and media outlets in Iran responded with considerably greater caution, suggesting that negotiations had not yet reached the stage described by the U.S. president.
Iran’s Fars News Agency, citing a source close to Tehran’s negotiating team, reported that no agreed draft of a preliminary memorandum of understanding currently exists between the two countries.
Tasnim News Agency likewise urged the public to treat Trump’s announcement carefully, noting that the U.S. president had made similar declarations dozens of times during the past two months without producing a finalized agreement.
“Until Iran announces any potential understanding, every statement from Trump on this issue should be viewed in the same context as his previous messages,” the agency said.
The cautious response reflected the continued uncertainty surrounding negotiations, even as diplomatic contacts reportedly remain active through multiple back channels.
Shortly before Trump’s announcement, Iranian Parliament Speaker and chief negotiator Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned Washington against pursuing further military escalation.
“A wrong strategy and impulsive decisions will worsen the situation, destroy infrastructure and energy markets, and create an endless quagmire that will trap you for years,” Ghalibaf said.
Iranian military officials also maintained a firm stance despite Trump’s remarks. Gen. Ali Abdollahi, chief of Iran’s military headquarters, warned that any American attack would trigger a significantly stronger response from Tehran.
“The flames of war, besides creating insecurity throughout the region, will spread even further and have far-reaching consequences,” Abdollahi said.
Diplomatic efforts to end the conflict that has persisted since Feb. 28 have continued through mediators from Pakistan and Qatar, both of which have sought to facilitate indirect communication between Washington and Tehran.
Pakistani officials, however, have acknowledged that meaningful progress remains difficult as military tensions continue to overshadow diplomatic negotiations.
China, the largest purchaser of Iranian crude oil, also renewed its appeal for restraint, urging both sides to halt military operations and engage constructively with ongoing mediation efforts.
“We urge the parties involved to immediately stop military operations and respond positively to mediation efforts,” a spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry said.
Although Trump’s announcement raised hopes of a possible diplomatic breakthrough, the contrasting responses from Tehran underscored the fragile nature of the negotiations. Until both governments publicly confirm the terms of any agreement, uncertainty is likely to continue over whether the latest developments represent a genuine step toward de-escalation or simply another pause in an increasingly volatile confrontation.
