TEHRAN – President Donald Trump’s decision to impose a naval blockade on Iranian ports in an effort to force Tehran to reopen the strategic Strait of Hormuz has drawn fierce criticism at home and abroad, with many warning it risks igniting a broader regional crisis and destabilizing the global economy.

The blockade began at 14:00 GMT on Monday, and the US military announced it had initiated operations targeting all maritime traffic entering and exiting Iranian ports. Trump warned that any ships attempting to break the blockade would be “immediately eliminated.”

The move followed weekend talks in Islamabad between Iran and the United States, which ended without an agreement in the wake of a two-week ceasefire mediated by Pakistan. That ceasefire, announced on April 8, halted the joint US-Israeli war on Iran that began on February 28. Iran also stopped retaliatory operations against Israel and American bases in the Persian Gulf region.

Shortly after the war began, Iran effectively asserted control over the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints. Prior to the conflict, nearly 20 percent of global oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies transited through the strait.

After the Pakistan-brokered ceasefire took effect, Tehran confirmed it would allow shipping to pass through the waterway during the two-week truce, helping ease market panic that had sent oil and gas prices soaring.

‘Illegal act of aggression’

Iran has denounced the US move to blockade the country’s ports. Iran’s Ambassador to the United Nations, Amir Saeid Iravani, condemned the blockade as a flagrant violation of Iran’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, calling it an illegal act of aggression that threatens regional and international peace.

In an official letter addressed to UN Secretary-General António Guterres and the President of the Security Council, Iravani described the naval blockade as “a gross violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran.”

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian warned that any threat to the security of the Strait of Hormuz would have large-scale consequences for global trade. In a phone call with French President Emmanuel Macron, Pezeshkian cautioned that US attempts to block maritime access to Iranian ports would jeopardize not only regional stability but also international commerce.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei sharply criticized Washington’s move in a post on X, asking: “Can an illegal ‘war of choice’ be won through a ‘revenge of choice’ against the global economy? Is it ever worthwhile to cut off one’s nose to spite one’s face?”

Parliament Speaker Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, who led the Islamabad talks, also reacted forcefully. “If they fight, we will fight; if they come with logic, we will deal with logic,” he wrote.
Qalibaf posted a map of Washington-area gasoline prices on social media with the comment: “Enjoy the current pump figures. With the so-called ‘blockade’. Soon you’ll be nostalgic for $4–$5 gas.”

No transit for enemy vessels 

In a statement issued Monday, Iran’s military warned that any threat to its ports would trigger a broader regional response, declaring that no port in the Persian Gulf or the Sea of Oman would remain secure if Iranian facilities were targeted.

Spokesman for the Armed Forces Lieutenant Colonel Ebrahim Zolfaqari said security in the two strategic waterways must apply to all or to none. He emphasized that defending national rights, including sovereignty over territorial waters, is a lawful obligation.

“Enemy-affiliated vessels do not and will not have the right to pass through the Strait of Hormuz,” he said, adding that other vessels would be allowed to transit in accordance with Iranian regulations.

The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) warned earlier that any military vessel attempting to transit the strait would be considered in violation of the ceasefire and would receive a firm and decisive response.

Prior to the ceasefire, Iran had announced that vessels affiliated to the US, Israel and countries involved in the war on Iran would not be permitted to transit through the Strait of Hormuz. But it allowed ships operated by other nations to transit through coordination with Iran.

International alarm mounts

China voiced opposition to the US naval blockade, warning that it would intensify tensions and undermine an already fragile ceasefire. At a regular press briefing, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said expanding military deployments and carrying out blockade operations would escalate contradictions rather than resolve them.

Russia also expressed concern, with officials cautioning that interference with free navigation in international waterways could have unpredictable consequences for global stability.

European diplomatic sources indicated unease as well, stressing the importance of maintaining maritime security and preventing further escalation in a region vital to global energy supplies.

Energy analysts warn that insurance premiums for tankers operating in the area are likely to surge, making global banks increasingly cautious. The tanker market could fragment into separate risk tiers, further complicating energy flows and increasing costs for consumers worldwide.

A risky gamble 

Trump’s blockade decision appears to follow mounting strategic setbacks. The 40-day war failed to achieve its declared objectives of compelling Iran to capitulate or fundamentally altering its regional posture. Instead, Tehran demonstrated its capacity to influence one of the world’s most sensitive maritime chokepoints.

The failure of the Islamabad talks further exposed Washington’s inability to translate military pressure into diplomatic gains. Having failed to secure concessions on the battlefield or at the negotiating table, the United States now appears to be escalating economic and maritime pressure in an attempt to regain leverage.

However, such actions risk undermining the already fragile ceasefire and further jeopardizing freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz. By targeting a corridor through which a fifth of global energy supplies pass, Washington is effectively weaponizing the global economy — a move critics describe as dangerous and irresponsible.

Rather than isolating Iran, the blockade may accelerate global backlash, deepen divisions among major powers, and drive energy-importing nations to seek alternatives to US-dominated financial and security structures.

If the objective is to pressure Tehran into submission, the strategy may prove counterproductive. Iran has shown it is prepared to respond asymmetrically and regionally. Meanwhile, rising fuel prices, surging insurance costs, and financial market volatility could impose tangible costs on American consumers and US allies alike.

In the end, the blockade of Hormuz may come to symbolize not strength, but strategic frustration — a high-risk gamble born out of failure in both war and diplomacy, with consequences that could reverberate far beyond the Persian Gulf.

Tehran Times

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attributed the failure to reach an agreement in the recent Pakistani-mediated talks between Iran and the US to Washington’s excessive demands and flip-flop.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The foreign minister of Iran stressed the need for all regional countries to join hands to protect peace and stability in the region and block the US’ destructive interference.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The commander of the IRGC Quds Force said the United States and the Zionist regime will have to leave the region without any achievements.

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The US President Donald Trump will lose Bab al-Mandab Strait if he takes any action against the Strait of Hormuz, an informed source told Tasnim.

TEHRAN – Every year in mid-spring, the Martyr Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei visited the Tehran International Book Fair (TIBF) as one of his prominent characteristics was his fondness for books and reading.

During his visits to various booths at the TIBF, the Martyr Leader addressed the most important issues in the publishing sector and expressed his concerns about books: from the challenge of sourcing and the high price of paper to the high cost of books and the necessity of protecting publishers’ rights against smuggling, ISNA reported.

Regarding books, he had said: “One should pay attention to books. One of the worst forms of indolence is laziness in reading books. The issue of books is important, and the country’s cultural development always needs books. A book is the most enduring work of art”.

Recounting the memories of his esteemed father, the Martyr Leader had said: “My father was always awake when we were asleep, and whenever we woke up, he was awake and busy reading… He was passionate about reading”.

The Minister of Culture and Islamic Guidance Seyyed Abbas Salehi has also recounted a memory of the Leader: “In 1978, following the attack by the Pahlavi regime on Imam Reza (AS) Hospital in Mashhad, a 14-day sit-in was organized by the Leader and the city’s scholars. It was said that during this time, the Leader was among the only scholars who had brought books with them and would read when he wasn’t speaking or in a meeting”.

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution was martyred during US-Israeli airstrikes that targeted his office in central Tehran on February 28, when an imposed war by the American-Zionist regimes against Iran started.

For 40 days, the aggressors martyred about 3,000 people including several officials and military commanders as well as numerous civilians, among them many women and children.

Ayatollah Khamenei was elected as Iran’s Leader in June 1989, following the passing of the Founder of the Islamic Republic, Imam Ruhollah Khomeini.

He was interested in poetry and literature. He was also fond of novel and short story. He read the world’s most well-known novels and short stories. He was also a literary critic and was in contact with many of the writers and intellectuals of his time.

The Martyr Leader attended many literary associations with the participation of great poets. He was not only a critic in poetry but also composed poems in the recent years. He also studied history books and had a good knowledge of modern history.

Ayatollah Khamenei started his research and writings when he was a theology student. He wrote and translated some books before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Some of his books and researches are: “General Outlines of Islamic Thought in the Quran”, “Patiance”, and “A Report about Historical Past and Present Condition of the Qom Seminary”.

He also translated books entitled “Imam Hassan Peace: History’s Most Magnificent Heroic Flexibility” written by Sheikh Rezi Al-e Yassin; and “Muslims in India’s Freedom Movement” written by Abdul Man’am al-Nemer.

This year’s edition of the Tehran International Book Fair was scheduled to be held from May 13 to 23; however, due to the current circumstances, it may be postponed.

*** Photo: Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei visits the Tehran International Book Fair in May 2016.

Tehran Times

ISLAMABAD- As a Wall Street banker with more than thirty years observing the turbulent waters of Iran-U.S. relations—from the transformative 1979 Islamic Revolution that reshaped the Middle East to the high-stakes Islamabad talks unfolding even as I write these words in April 2026—I have witnessed cycles of hope and betrayal that few other relationships can match.

Twice in recent memory, while genuine negotiations were actively progressing, American military force struck Iranian territory. In June 2025, during the first round of Omani-mediated talks that had shown cautious progress, the United States launched devastating airstrikes under Operation Midnight Hammer, targeting the Fordow and Natanz nuclear facilities, and the Isfahan nuclear technology center with bunker-buster bombs and Tomahawk missiles.

Then, in early 2026, even as indirect discussions continued in Geneva and other venues, further U.S.-Israeli operations escalated tensions dramatically. Iranian diplomats and officials rightly described these actions as unprovoked betrayals of the negotiating spirit. We were seated at the table in good faith, exchanging proposals through mediators, yet Washington chose the language of force.

The message sent to every Iranian family in Tehran, Tabriz, or Shiraz—and to our vast, people across Europe, North America, and beyond—was crystal clear: America’s commitments, even amid dialogue, remain fragile and untrustworthy. Yet Iran persists in these Islamabad talks not out of weakness, but from the deep well of resilience that has defined our nation since the Revolution. We choose principled engagement because true strength lies in defending sovereignty while extending a hand for mutual respect.

The historical ledger since 1979 reveals a pattern of American pressure met by Iranian endurance. Following the hostage crisis, the Carter administration froze billions in Iranian assets—funds earned from the sweat of our people and belonging rightfully to them. Sanctions accumulated through the 1980s and 1990s, intensified under successive U.S. administrations with oil embargoes and extraterritorial measures that targeted third-country businesses. The 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) offered a brief window of relief: Iran curtailed aspects of its peaceful nuclear program in exchange for sanctions lifting, verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Economic indicators improved noticeably—GDP growth accelerated, inflation eased somewhat, and ordinary citizens glimpsed a more stable future.

But in 2018, the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew, reimposing “maximum pressure” sanctions that strangled trade, medicine imports, and civilian aviation spares. Partial unfreezes, such as the 2023 Qatar-held funds tied to a prisoner swap, were later clawed back. This cycle of broken promises has exacted a heavy human toll: families struggling with inflated prices, hospitals facing shortages, and industries starved of technology. Yet Iran’s “economy of resistance”—built on domestic innovation, strategic partnerships with Russia, China, and regional allies—has weathered the storm, proving that no external pressure can break a nation rooted in self-reliance and revolutionary ideals.

Today, amid the Islamabad negotiations—mediated by Pakistan and involving senior figures like Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and U.S. envoys including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner—signals emerge of possible movement on frozen assets. Iranian sources indicate Washington may agree to unfreeze approximately $6 billion held in Qatari banks and other overseas accounts, funds originating from oil revenues blocked since 2018. For Iran, this is not benevolence; it is elementary justice long denied.

These resources can swiftly address pressing needs: reconstructing infrastructure damaged in recent conflicts, upgrading power generation to ease summer blackouts, bolstering healthcare systems strained by years of sanctions, and injecting liquidity into small and medium enterprises that employ millions. The benefits would ripple outward—stabilizing the rial, creating jobs for youth, and allowing our scientists and engineers to focus on advancement rather than circumvention. For the Iranian diaspora, many of whom maintain deep emotional and cultural ties despite living abroad, such relief would mean renewed confidence in investing back home or supporting family without the shadow of financial isolation.

From America’s perspective, honoring asset release and pursuing a durable accord serves practical self-interest. Perpetual confrontation has cost Washington trillions in Middle East entanglements, with little to show beyond instability. A negotiated settlement promises lower global oil price volatility—critical for American consumers and industries—safer passage through the Strait of Hormuz, through which a significant portion of the world’s energy flows, and reduced exposure of U.S. forces to regional risks. No more American lives needlessly placed in harm’s way for policies that have repeatedly failed to deliver regime change or submission. Instead, Washington could redirect resources toward domestic priorities, rebuilding credibility eroded by policy flip-flops that have alienated even traditional allies.

Practical outcomes hinge on realism and reciprocity. Any lasting agreement must incorporate phased, verifiable sanctions relief synchronized with IAEA-monitored steps on Iran’s peaceful nuclear program. Iran has consistently affirmed its commitment: no pursuit of nuclear weapons, full adherence to non-proliferation norms, yet insistence on its inalienable right to enrichment for energy and medical isotopes under international safeguards. Explicit, legally binding guarantees against future unprovoked military strikes—whether direct U.S. operations or enabled proxies—are non-negotiable. Broader regional de-escalation should address proxy dynamics without demanding Iran abandon its legitimate defensive posture or role as a stabilizing force in West Asia. Iran’s negotiating team, drawing on decades of diplomatic experience and intimate knowledge of red lines rooted in national dignity, enters these talks from a position of strength. America’s side, often blending political appointees with business-oriented figures, must recognize that bullying tactics or last-minute betrayals will only prolong mistrust.

Confidence-building measures could accelerate progress. Immediate unfreezing of assets within weeks, paired with reciprocal de-escalation such as eased restrictions on humanitarian trade, would demonstrate seriousness. A structured timeline—perhaps 45-90 days for initial sanctions relief in exchange for enhanced but non-intrusive IAEA access—provides measurable milestones. Mechanisms to prevent sabotage by third parties, including clear communication channels and dispute resolution forums, are essential. Regionally, understandings that secure shipping lanes while respecting sovereign rights could reduce flashpoints in the Persian Gulf and beyond.

The dividends of peace extend far beyond governments. For Iran and its resilient people, success means economic revival: reintegration into global markets, access to advanced technology for sustainable development, modernization of infrastructure, and a brighter horizon for the next generation. Families in Isfahan or Mashhad would witness stabilized prices, improved education and healthcare, and the dignity that comes from a sovereign nation treated as an equal. Our diaspora communities—doctors, engineers, entrepreneurs thriving abroad—could channel expertise and capital more freely, strengthening bonds rather than nursing grievances born of isolation.
For ordinary Americans, the gains are equally tangible: avoidance of another trillion-dollar quagmire, predictable energy costs that ease inflation pressures at the pump and in factories, and restoration of diplomatic credibility after years of unilateralism that isolated Washington on the world stage.

Iran has never sought domination or endless conflict. The 1979 Revolution was fundamentally about independence, justice, and resistance to external interference. We have defended our borders and principles with resolve, yet repeatedly extended olive branches when respect was offered. Practical suggestions for both sides are straightforward and grounded in mutual benefit. First, treat negotiations as sovereign-to-sovereign dialogue, not zero-sum games. Second, prioritize verifiable, irreversible sanctions relief over vague promises. Third, incorporate sunset clauses with review mechanisms to build long-term confidence rather than perpetual suspicion. Fourth, address humanitarian dimensions explicitly—ensuring medicine, food, and civilian aviation spares flow without hindrance. Fifth, foster parallel economic tracks, perhaps through third-party guarantees involving China, Russia, or European actors, to insulate any deal from future U.S. domestic politics.

As these Islamabad talks unfold—potentially extending over critical days with trilateral elements involving Pakistani mediation—the world watches. Iran stands ready: resilient after decades of pressure, prepared to defend its core interests, yet open to a dignified peace that heals wounds and charts a stable regional future. If America finally learns from past betrayals and honors its undertakings, both nations and their peoples emerge as winners. No victors imposing terms, no vanquished submitting—simply two proud civilizations choosing dialogue over drones, cooperation over confrontation. The choice, ultimately, rests with Washington. Iran, true to its revolutionary spirit and historical depth, awaits with cautious hope, unwavering dignity, and the quiet confidence that justice and resilience will prevail.

(This article was written before the talks between Iran and the U.S. in Pakistan ended inconclusively due to excessive demands from the American side)

Mir Mohammad Alikhan is First Muslim Wall Street Investment Bank Founder. Author of 6 books and Ex-Federal Advisor to Pakistan

Tehran Times

EHRAN- Iran’s Parliament Speaker, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, said the United States has yet to earn Tehran’s trust following the latest round of negotiations held in Islamabad.

In a post on X on Sunday, Qalibaf, who headed Iran’s negotiating delegation, stated that the talks concluded without tangible results, as the American side failed to convince Iranian officials of its credibility.

“Before the negotiations, I emphasized that we possess the necessary goodwill and determination. However, based on the experience of two previous wars, we do not trust the other side,” he wrote. “Members of the Iranian delegation presented constructive initiatives, but ultimately, the opposing side was unable to gain the trust of the Iranian team during this round.”

He added that the United States had come to understand Iran’s logic and principles, stressing that Washington must now decide whether it is capable of building trust with Tehran.

Qalibaf further underscored that Iran will continue to pursue a “diplomacy of power” alongside its military resistance, describing the approach as essential to safeguarding the rights of the Iranian people. He noted that efforts to consolidate the achievements of “forty days of national defense” would remain ongoing.

The speaker also expressed gratitude to Pakistan for hosting and facilitating the negotiations, and praised the Iranian public for their support, saying they had rallied in large numbers in response to guidance from the country’s leadership. He also commended his negotiating team for their efforts during the “intensive 21-hour talks.”

Senior Iranian and US officials met in Islamabad on Saturday to explore a permanent resolution to the US-Israeli war against Iran, following a two-week ceasefire between Iran and the United States. The discussions ended without an agreement.

Tehran Times

TEHRAN – After 40 days of war, Iran and the United States have agreed to a two-week ceasefire to negotiate based on a 10-point peace plan that Iran submitted through Pakistan last week. The first round of talks is scheduled for Friday in Islamabad—provided that Israel does not succeed in destroying the ceasefire, which it began violating just hours after the agreement was announced by Pakistan and the warring parties.

The Prime Minister of Pakistan, a country that maintains good relations with both Iran and the United States, was the first to break the news. In a post on X, Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stated that the ceasefire halts the exchange of fire between Iran and the United States, as well as Israeli bombing of Lebanon. He expressed hope that the Islamabad Talks would achieve “sustainable peace” in West Asia.

U.S. President Donald Trump said in a social media post that Washington had deemed Iran’s 10-point plan “a workable basis on which to negotiate.”

U.S. War Secretary Pete Hegseth claimed during a press conference on Wednesday that the Trump administration had achieved all of its war objectives, which included preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He added that Iran no longer has “any sort of a comprehensive air defense system” and that “their missile program is functionally destroyed.”

Iran has never moved toward developing nuclear weapons—a fact confirmed by the most comprehensive inspection regime of the IAEA, which had been ongoing since 2015 until the U.S. bombed Iran’s nuclear facilities in June and claimed to have “obliterated” them. Iranians participated in a second round of negotiations with Washington in February to reach a deal that would limit their nuclear program and ensure it would not develop nuclear weapons, but the Trump administration derailed those talks as well by launching the recent war on February 28. According to a fatwa (religious decree) issued by the late Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, Iranians are not permitted to develop nuclear weapons. His son, Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei, who now succeeds him, has yet to repeal that decree.

Hegseth’s claims about degrading Iran’s missile program and air defense systems also lack evidence on the ground. Iran continuously fired missiles and drones at U.S. bases across seven countries, as well as at Israel, since the war began. In its latest wave of attacks—the 100th, conducted on Wednesday—it struck 25 positions across Israel and the Persian Gulf. Iran also kept the Strait of Hormuz closed to ships belonging to hostile governments throughout the entire war, and for the next 14 days, vessels will only be allowed passage in coordination with Iran’s military.

During his briefing, Hegseth asserted, “Iran begged for this ceasefire—and we all know it… Operation Epic Fury was a historic and overwhelming victory on the battlefield.” However, sources have told the Tehran Times that the U.S. War Secretary’s remarks are completely false, and that it was Washington that “begged” Iran for a ceasefire.

US lost a war it began due to delusions

Analysts say Trump’s war was based on a miscalculation: by assassinating Ayatollah Khamenei on the first day of the war and carrying out a relentless bombing campaign on civilian sites, they believed either the Iranian people would topple the Islamic Republic or the government would be forced to capitulate. Some reports suggest Israel was the mastermind behind the war.

Instead, Iranians rallied behind the Islamic Republic, taking to the streets nightly to express support for their government despite nonstop U.S.-Israeli bombardment. Iranian officials also refused to back down, and despite the constant threat of assassination, stated they would carry out their duties and gladly die for their country. Multiple high-ranking Iranian officials, including Security Chief Ali Larijani, were assassinated over the past 40 days, but each was replaced by an equally determined successor.

The Trump administration also grossly underestimated Iran’s military strength, analysts say. Reports suggest at least 70% of American bases across West Asia now lie in ruins. Energy prices have increased significantly due to the situation at the Strait of Hormuz, and the global economic fallout is expected to persist even if the war ends indefinitely.

Iran has stated it remains ready to resume all-out war against U.S. and Israeli interests should it determine that Americans are once again not serious about diplomacy. In a statement, the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, the body overseeing the war, said it would await the outcome of the negotiations but affirmed that it has its “finger on the trigger.”

Hebrew media reports indicate that Israel is unhappy with the ceasefire and the prospect of an agreement. The regime’s actions have confirmed those reports. Israel attacked an oil refinery on southern Lavan Island on Wednesday morning, to which Iran responded by striking U.S.-linked energy sites in the UAE and Kuwait.

Israel also carried out one of its deadliest massacres against Lebanon after the ceasefire was announced, killing and injuring hundreds of people in bombings across Beirut. Sources have told Fars News Agency that Iran is preparing to respond to those attacks as well.

Joe Kent, former director of the U.S. National Counterterrorism Centre, who resigned in March in protest of the war against Iran, said in a video message posted on X that Washington must ensure that “Israelis do not sabotage” the ceasefire agreement between the U.S. and Iran.

“The last thing we need is the Israelis doing what they have done in past negotiations—targeting the negotiators or taking a series of strikes that escalates the conflict,” Kent stated.

Tehran Times

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – The Islamic Revolution Guards Corps (IRGC) said its forces shot down an Israeli UAV in the airspace of Iran’s southern province of Fars on Wednesday afternoon, warning the Zionist regime and the US that violation of a temporary ceasefire won’t go unanswered.