On April 13 local time, U.S. Vice President Vance stated that the military objectives against Iran have been achieved, and it is now possible to begin winding down this conflict.

Vance said: "We have reached a stage where our objectives have been met, and we can start gradually wrapping things up. I would prefer to end this through successful negotiations."

Vance's remarks first clarified the prerequisite for the United States to conclude the conflict—the so-called "objectives." This does not refer to the end of military operations, but rather sets an unyielding bottom line for subsequent negotiations.

The core conditions proposed by the U.S. for ending the conflict mainly include two points:

Completely resolving the nuclear issue, which the U.S. repeatedly emphasizes as its "red line." Specifically, Iran is required to surrender all enriched uranium and make a clear commitment not to develop nuclear weapons.

Guaranteeing free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. The U.S. demands that Iran must open the Strait of Hormuz to ensure freedom of passage on international shipping routes.

Therefore, when Vance mentioned "objectives achieved," it should more accurately be understood as the U.S. hoping Iran makes concessions on these core issues, thereby paving the way for a "successful negotiation."

Vance’s statement reflects both America’s eagerness to end the war and the domestic political and economic pressures within the country.

Ongoing military conflict has already caused sharp increases in domestic oil and fertilizer prices in the U.S., triggering public dissatisfaction. Ending the conflict quickly would help stabilize markets and alleviate pressure on the Trump administration domestically.

The U.S. Congress has also expressed concern over the prolonged war. The Trump administration needs a tangible "victory" to present to the American public, and reaching a grand agreement through negotiations would be an ideal way to conclude the matter.

Although Vance sent signals indicating a willingness to resolve the dispute through talks, the outlook for the conflict remains highly uncertain.

Multiple sources indicate that the U.S. and Iran may hold their second round of negotiations on April 16 in Islamabad, Pakistan. This will serve as a crucial window to test whether both sides are willing and capable of reaching a compromise.

If the talks break down again, the Trump administration has prepared measures such as a maritime blockade and limited military strikes to break the deadlock.

Currently, there remains a significant gap between U.S. and Iranian positions on core issues like the nuclear program and control over the strait, making a comprehensive agreement in the short term extremely difficult.

In summary, Vance’s remarks are not a signal that the conflict is about to end, but rather mark a new phase in the U.S.-Iran rivalry—shifting toward negotiations as the primary approach, with military pressure serving as a secondary tool. The final outcome depends on the results of the next round of negotiations and how Iran responds to the U.S. “ultimatum.”

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1862408583029760/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author.