Can Iran and Trump really agree on a peace plan?

This episode of ABC News Daily examines the sudden ceasefire between the United States and Iran following a dramatic escalation in rhetoric and military action led by former President Donald Trump. Trump had threatened to destroy Iran's infrastructure, including power plants and bridges, warning that a 'whole civilisation' would die if Iran did not comply with U.S. demands. Just hours before the deadline, he announced a two-week ceasefire and a negotiation window in Islamabad, based on Iran's 10-point plan. However, experts like Barbara Slavin from the Stimson Centre caution that this is not a peace agreement but a fragile pause, with deep mistrust on both sides and no consensus on key issues like nuclear policy, sanctions, or compensation for war damage. Iran claims a strategic victory, portraying Trump's retreat as humiliation, while the U.S. and Israel have suffered diminishing returns despite military gains. The episode underscores the catastrophic humanitarian and economic toll, with damaged infrastructure, global oil price volatility, and the enduring control of the Strait of Hormuz by Iran. Despite the pause, experts warn that the region remains on the brink, with no lasting peace in sight due to unresolved regional grievances and the volatile nature of leadership in the Middle East. Key takeaways include: 1) The ceasefire is a tactical pause, not a peace deal, with no agreement on core issues like nuclear programs or sanctions. 2) Iran’s control of the Strait of Hormuz gives it significant leverage, and it may continue charging tolls on shipping. 3) Both the U.S. and Israel suffered strategic setbacks despite military strength, with exhausted populations and diminishing returns. 4) The war has deepened regional instability, with no political or social change in Iran despite heavy casualties. 5) Leadership in the region remains authoritarian and resistant to reform, making lasting peace unlikely. 6) The episode highlights the dangers of impulsive, non-expert-driven foreign policy, especially under leaders like Trump who act on instinct rather than strategy.