A negotiated US-Iran settlement is the right course; the strike-and-talk cycle must end in a deal

The war between the United States and Iran and the closure of the Strait of Hormuz are the subject of this position. It holds that a negotiated settlement between Washington and Tehran is the only sustainable way to end the war and reopen the strait, that mediation deserves support, and that the cycle of strikes and talks is costly for everyone. Its advocates welcome signs of progress and de-escalation and give credit to mediators.

The position appears in the dispute over the US-Iran ceasefire and negotiation track, where 70 outlets voice it. Actors in recent events include President Trump, Vice President Vance, Iran's foreign minister Araghchi and the mediators Qatar, Pakistan and Oman.

No competing position is named. Critics of the talks, quoted in recent events, say the United States is surrendering to Iran, while Iranian officials dispute US conduct and conditions for reopening the strait. Recent events show a signed deal to end hostilities, talks in Switzerland that mediators called encouraging, and later a stalled process with threats of strikes and a possible Iran-Oman arrangement for the strait.