Donald Trump’s Ceasefire Push: Iran–Israel Conflict Update
How a “12‑Day War” Led to Ceasefire Talk
On June 23, 2025, former U.S. President Donald Trump dramatically announced a "complete and total ceasefire" between Israel and Iran, calling it the end of a so‑called “12‑Day War.” He stated that it would be phased—Iran halts its strikes first, followed by Israel—with a full cessation of hostilities within 24 hours. Trump boasted that all Iranian nuclear sites had been “obliterated” and praised both nations for embracing peace.
Yet, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi immediately denied any agreement had been made, stressing that Tehran would only stop if Israel did so first. Despite that, both sides briefly ceased major attacks—a fragile calm that persisted into June 25, with limited breaches on both fronts.
Trump’s Tactics: Pressure, Mediation, and Frustration
1. Direct Mediation and Military Options
Trump leveraged aggressive messaging and direct pressure to force the truce. He personally intervened, calling Prime Minister Netanyahu, while the U.S. and Qatar acted as intermediaries. Initially reluctant to back Israel’s strikes, Trump later ordered U.S. strikes on Iranian nuclear sites around June 21, claiming the job was done.
2. Pushing for Regime Change—But Reconsidering
In the ritual of "Make Iran Great Again," Trump floated the possibility of regime change if internal reform failed. Yet he soon pushed back, citing fears of “chaos”, drawing parallels to post‑Gaddafi Libya.
3. Frustration at the Truce’s Fragility
Though the ceasefire briefly took effect, early violations triggered Trump's ire. He urged Israel not to retaliate, and chastised both nations for risking the fragile peace — a peace he framed as his own foreign‑policy coup ahead of the NATO summit in The Hague.
Who Violated the Ceasefire—Early Skirmishes
Both sides tested the ceasefire almost immediately:
-
Iran launched missiles at Beersheba, killing at least five civilians, prompting Israeli strikes targeting radar and nuclear sites.
-
Israel reportedly carried out drone incursions into Iranian airspace and attacked Tehran early in the morning, leading Iran to respond with missile fire on Be’er Sheva .
Still, while missteps occurred, full‑scale warfare was avoided.
What’s at Stake: Regional Fallout & Strategic Cards
| Element | Key Details |
|---|---|
| Iran's Leverage | Although militarily weaker, Iran could still endanger oil shipments via the Strait of Hormuz, use proxies, or try nuclear program rebuild. |
| Israel's Goals | Aimed to cripple Iran’s nuclear ambitions and leadership, and remains ready to act on violations. |
| Global Concerns | European leaders (UK’s Starmer, NATO) have called for diplomatic rather than military fixes . |
| Market Response | Oil futures dropped, equities rose, and investors voiced optimism—but cautioned that unresolved nuclear tensions could re‑ignite volatility . |
| U.S. Role | Trump claims diplomatic credit, yet lacks formal government authority—making his influence more rhetorical than legal. |
Takeaways
-
Trump’s announcement drove initial negotiations, but lacked formal legal backing.
-
Immediate violations on both sides underscored a fragile ceasefire.
-
Economic relief was felt globally, though analysts warned of relapse if no comprehensive deal is struck.
-
Iranian denial suggests unresolved diplomatic foundations.
-
Proxy engagements via Hezbollah, Houthis, and Gulf tensions remain active elements.
-
Trump’s dual stance on regime change complicates his diplomatic brand—favoring both coercion and caution.
What Comes Next?
-
Trump’s next moves: He will attend the NATO summit in The Hague, hoping to frame the ceasefire as a policy triumph.
-
Ceasefire durability: Will hinges on diplomatic follow‑up—any new airstrike, missile launch, or provocation risks unraveling the truce.
-
Iran’s strategy: Likely to include covert escalations, pressure on oil flows, and reliance on proxies if direct engagement falters .
-
Future negotiations: May involve broader indirect talks on nuclear limits, potentially mediated by the U.S. and Gulf states.
Conculsion
Trump’s ceasefire push carried dramatic flair and generated immediate calm. But the truces were volatile, unverified, and lacking legal binding. Violations from both Iran and Israel within 24 hours exposed deep mistrust and operational uncertainty. While global markets welcomed the halting of open conflict, the core issues—Iran’s nuclear ambitions, regional proxy clashes, and strategic recalculations—are far from resolved.
As Trump heads to the NATO stage, the world watches to see if his diplomacy momentum persists or backslides into regional breakdown. Whether this ceasefire becomes the launchpad for peace or just a pause in the cycle of violence remains to be seen.
