Trump Says Iran War 'Very Close to Over' as Fragile Ceasefire Nears Expiration

President Donald Trump said Wednesday that the seven-week conflict with Iran is “very close to being over,” with direct negotiations between American and Iranian teams expected to resume within days in Pakistan. The comments come as the U.S. military has enforced a total shutdown of maritime traffic in and out of Iranian ports, a pressure tactic that appears aimed at forcing Tehran to accept terms that prevent it from ever acquiring nuclear weapons.

In interviews with Fox Business and the New York Post, Trump described the Iranian regime as severely weakened. “We’ve obliterated them,” he said. “If I pulled up stakes right now, it would take them 20 years to rebuild that country.” He added that American forces could eliminate every bridge and power plant in Iran within an hour if necessary, but emphasized that such destruction would only delay eventual reconstruction. “We don’t want to do that, because some day you have to rebuild,” Trump said.

The current two-week ceasefire expires April 21. Vice President JD Vance led the first round of talks in Islamabad over the weekend. Those discussions ended without a final agreement, primarily over Washington’s insistence that Iran forswear nuclear weapons development. Iranian officials have claimed their program is peaceful, a assertion few serious observers credit after years of evasion and enrichment beyond civilian needs.

Despite the impasse, Trump told reporters to keep American negotiators in place in Pakistan because “something could be happening over the next two days.” He praised Pakistan’s army chief, Field Marshal Gen. Asim Munir, for maintaining open channels with Tehran and for his past success in de-escalating tensions between Pakistan and India. “He’s fantastic,” Trump said, “and therefore it’s more likely that we go back there. Why should we go to some country that has nothing to do with it?”

A senior Iranian source told Reuters no final date has been set, but officials in Pakistan, Iran, and Gulf states confirmed that teams from both sides are preparing to return. The Institute for the Study of War noted that Iran may attempt to drag out talks to buy time for military recovery, a pattern familiar from past nuclear negotiations that produced the flawed 2015 agreement.

While diplomacy continues, the U.S. Navy under Central Command has completely halted seaborne trade to and from Iran. Admiral Brad Cooper reported that even vessels owned by sanctioned Chinese entities, such as the tanker Rich Starry, have been turned away from the Strait of Hormuz. The move has disrupted Iran’s ability to export oil and import needed supplies, adding economic pain to the military setbacks the regime has suffered.

Oil prices nevertheless fell for a second straight day on hopes that a durable agreement would restore some stability to energy markets. Trump predicted broader economic gains once the conflict ends. “The stock market is going to boom,” he said. “It’s already booming.” The contrast is instructive: military pressure paired with the credible threat of further action has produced the first serious opening for peace since the fighting began in late February. Previous administrations relied on sanctions that leaked and diplomatic gestures that emboldened Iran’s leaders. The result was an Iranian nuclear program that advanced steadily while Tehran funded proxies across the region.

Trump has repeatedly stated that inaction would have left Iran with a nuclear weapon. “If I didn’t do that right now, you would have Iran with a nuclear weapon,” he told Fox Business. “And if they had a nuclear weapon, you would be calling everybody over there ‘Sir.’”

The current approach reflects a realist understanding that adversaries respond to strength, not rhetoric. By demonstrating that the United States will use force to protect vital interests and by maintaining a blockade that imposes real costs, the administration has altered Tehran’s calculus. Iran’s leaders now face a choice between continued isolation and a deal that, while painful, allows some prospect of recovery.

This week’s developments also highlight the importance of reliable partners. Pakistan’s role as intermediary underscores how relationships built on pragmatic interests can serve American purposes better than multilateral forums that often dilute accountability. Field Marshal Munir’s direct line to Tehran gives the talks a channel that European venues lack.

Critics at home and abroad have questioned the pace and consequences of the campaign. Some European leaders, including Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, have echoed concerns from religious figures about civilian impacts. Trump responded sharply, arguing that allowing a nuclear Iran would ultimately cost far more lives. Domestic polling has shown some erosion in support among certain voter groups, yet the administration’s focus remains on completing the mission rather than managing daily news cycles.

Negotiators head into the next round with clear American priorities: verifiable dismantlement of Iran’s nuclear weapons infrastructure, an end to support for regional militias, and structural changes that reduce the regime’s ability to threaten global shipping lanes. Trump has signaled he is in no mood for cosmetic concessions that allow Iran to claim victory. “I don’t want them to feel like they have a win,” he said.

The coming days will test whether Iranian representatives arrive prepared to make the strategic decision their predecessors avoided for decades. If they do, the result could be a more stable Middle East and relief for ordinary Iranians who have suffered under both economic mismanagement and ideological adventurism. If not, the U.S. retains the capacity to increase pressure.

Either outcome will owe less to hopeful diplomacy than to the prior demonstration that aggression carries consequences. That principle, applied consistently, has brought the parties back to the table. Whether it produces a lasting agreement depends on whether Tehran finally recognizes the changed reality.