Big questions remain even as Pentagon declares ‘decisive’ victory in Iran
Thirty-eight days of combat, 13,000 targets hit and a “decisive military victory” — at least according to the Pentagon.
The Trump administration is presenting the war with Iran as a U.S. victory. Still, the ceasefire that took effect Tuesday leaves several major questions unsettled.
Will Iran truly allow shipping through the Strait of Hormuz? What is the status of Iran’s enriched uranium and its nuclear ambitions? And will negotiations between the U.S. and Iran produce an agreement on economic sanctions, nuclear enrichment and missile-related issues?
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called the campaign a “decisive” victory, while Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Dan Caine said the ceasefire is only a “pause” and that U.S. forces remain ready.
“Let us be clear,” Caine said during a Pentagon briefing Wednesday, “a ceasefire is a pause and the joint force remains ready if ordered or called upon to resume combat operations with the same speed and precision as we’ve demonstrated over the last 38 days.”
Key elements of the ceasefire are already in doubt.
According to Iran’s government-affiliated Fars News Agency, oil tankers transiting the Strait were halted on Wednesday after what it described as a violation of the ceasefire by Israel. Although Israel agreed to pause military operations in Iran, it continues to attack Hezbollah positions in Lebanon.
Why the ‘victory’ claims face an early test
The administration is arguing that the war achieved its main goals.
Hegseth said that the U.S. had rendered Iran’s military “combat-ineffective for years to come” and had “functionally destroyed” its missile program. He added that Washington is now dealing with what he called a “new regime” in Tehran.
Hegseth said Iran had “systematically” lost its top leadership, including the previous Supreme Leader and the Supreme National Security Council secretary.
However, reporting from inside Iran suggests the power structure remains heavily shaped by hard-line security figures. Iran International and the Institute for the Study of War reported that Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps figures, especially Ahmad Vahidi and Ali Abdollahi, are driving key wartime decisions, while the authority of President Masoud Pezeshkian, a relative moderate, has shrunk. That suggests hard-line security actors remain central to decision-making even after the ceasefire.
Why uranium and sanctions remain unresolved
When Trump announced the military operation against Iran on Feb. 28, he used the word “nuclear” 11 times during his eight-minute speech, suggesting that preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons was a key objective. Available reporting points to a more complicated outcome.
Haaretz reported that major differences remain between Iran’s ceasefire proposal and U.S. positions, including over enrichment and sanctions. Key questions also remain over the future of Iran’s missile program, the terms of any nuclear settlement and the status of its enriched uranium.
Hegseth said Wednesday that if Iran did not surrender its uranium, the U.S. would take it by force if necessary. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported that Iran possessed about 970 pounds of highly enriched uranium as of June 2025. Iran has not publicly committed to turning it over to the Americans or other parties.
Iran’s Supreme National Security Council left the fate of the country’s enriched uranium open in its proposed framework for talks, suggesting that major differences remain over enrichment, sanctions and the terms of any broader settlement.
According to an American Nuclear Society summary of IAEA reporting, U.S. and Israeli strikes last summer destroyed the aboveground pilot enrichment plant at Natanz and damaged multiple facilities at Esfahan. However, no damage was reported at Fordow.
The same summary quoted IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi saying there was no evidence Iran was building a bomb, while also warning that Iran’s large stockpile of near-weapons-grade uranium and limits on inspector access remained serious concerns.
Based on its independent analysis of new satellite imagery and detailed knowledge of the site, the IAEA can confirm recent impacts of military strikes close to Iran’s Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant (BNPP), including one just 75 metres from the site perimeter. The BNPP itself has not… pic.twitter.com/zWpp3IaFLW
— IAEA – International Atomic Energy Agency
(@iaeaorg) April 6, 2026
Why Hormuz remains a pressure point
The Strait of Hormuz may be the biggest sticking point in the ceasefire. The New York Times reported Wednesday that shipping through the strait remains throttled, with around 800 tankers waiting on either side and only a handful of vessels crossing since the truce took effect.
Iran’s foreign minister said passage would be possible only if coordinated with Iran’s military and subject to “technical limitations,” a formulation that has left shipowners, insurers and analysts wary.
That is not the same as restoring the prewar status quo. The Times reported that before the war, more than 130 ships crossed the strait each day; since the war began, only about 120 ships total have made the passage. Even if traffic improves, experts told The Times that shipping and fuel flows could take months to normalize.
What the next round of talks will have to resolve
With many issues unresolved, talks between the U.S. and Iran are expected to begin in Islamabad on Friday and could last up to 15 days. The immediate test is whether the ceasefire holds and whether Iran’s limited reopening of the Strait of Hormuz allows shipping to resume as normal.
The bigger test is whether Washington can turn battlefield gains into a settlement that resolves uranium, missiles, sanctions and maritime access — issues that remain unsettled even as Trump and his aides claim victory.
Ella Rae Greene, Editor In Chief
