US-Iran war: Iran says conflict likely to resume 2026

Iran military headquarters issues fresh warning

Iran’s military headquarters said the resumption of war between the United States and Iran is “likely”, arguing that evidence shows Washington is not committed to any agreement or treaty. The message adds to uncertainty around the ceasefire and ongoing diplomatic contacts. Iranian officials say Tehran has shown enough flexibility both before the war and during the ceasefire, including talks held in Islamabad. Iranian media reports and regional coverage described the statement as a sign that Iran now expects fighting to continue.

Who made the statement and how it was reported

Mohammad Jafar Asadi, linked to the military’s central command centre Khatam al-Anbiya, was quoted by Iran’s Fars news agency saying renewed conflict was “likely”. The statement was carried across multiple reports, with the same central claim that the United States is not committed to “promises or agreements.” Another report described Asadi as a deputy of the military headquarters and said his remarks were delivered as an official statement. The language used across the reports points to a coordinated message from Iran’s armed forces.

Ceasefire, stalled talks, and the Islamabad channel

The backdrop is a ceasefire that has not delivered a broader political settlement. Reporting indicated that talks were held in Islamabad before the war began, and that discussions continued during the ceasefire period. But peace talks remain stalled, according to the reports, with Iran arguing its flexibility has not been reciprocated. The immediate implication from Tehran’s side is that diplomacy has not produced commitments it considers credible.

Trump’s response to Iran’s latest proposal

US President Donald Trump criticised Iran’s latest proposal in negotiations, and reports said he rejected the proposal. Trump said Iran was seeking concessions he could not accept. Even as negotiations continue, Trump has also claimed the war has been “terminated” because of the ceasefire. Those remarks sit alongside warnings reported in the live coverage that, if there is no deal when the ceasefire expires, the blockade would remain and bombing could resume.

Strait of Hormuz and Iran’s “strict management” move

A separate report said Iran’s central military command would resume “strict management” of the Strait of Hormuz, reversing a decision to unblock the channel as part of negotiations with Washington. The rationale given was that Washington had broken a promise by continuing its naval blockade of ships sailing to and from Iran’s ports. The Strait of Hormuz is repeatedly flagged across the coverage as a key flashpoint, including in discussion around sanctions and shipping fees.

US naval blockade and enforcement claims

The US has maintained a naval blockade tied to the conflict, and one update said US Central Command reported stopping 45 vessels attempting to breach its naval blockade of Iran. Another report said the US cautioned that shipping fees paid to Iran for the Strait of Hormuz may result in sanctions. Iran’s UN envoy, Amir Saeid Iravani, was also reported as saying talks are possible only after the US blockade ends, linking the diplomatic track directly to the blockade.

Iran’s posture: “high alert” and readiness to respond

Asadi said Iran’s armed forces remain on high alert and are ready to respond to any escalation. He warned that the armed forces are “fully prepared” for what he described as any new “adventures” from the Americans. In parallel, Iran’s UN envoy was quoted saying Iran is prepared for both diplomacy and war, and that Iran did not initiate the military aggression. The combined messaging indicates Tehran wants to keep the option of talks open, but not at the cost of reducing military readiness.

War Powers deadline and domestic US politics mentioned in reports

The reports also referenced the US War Powers Resolution, describing it as requiring Congress to declare war or authorise the use of force within 60 days. Trump called the War Powers Resolution “unconstitutional,” according to the coverage. The May 1 deadline was described as set to pass without action after lawmakers left town for a week, following the Senate rejecting a Democratic attempt to halt the war for a sixth time. These details signal that domestic political constraints and oversight debates are part of the wider context.

Oil, shipping, and spillover signals

Iran’s statement cited US officials’ actions and statements as “media-driven,” and aimed at preventing a drop in oil prices, according to the report. One live update also said oil prices moved above $100 a barrel after US-Israeli strikes on Iran, in the context of a US low-cost airline shutting down operations and citing increased jet fuel prices. While those operational impacts are outside the core diplomatic track, they underline how shipping lanes and energy costs are being pulled into the conflict narrative.

Key facts snapshot

Why this matters for markets and risk monitoring

The sequence of statements keeps conflict risk elevated even with a ceasefire in place. The coverage links negotiations to concrete operational levers such as the naval blockade and the management of the Strait of Hormuz. When those levers become bargaining points, market attention typically shifts to shipping, energy pricing, and sanctions exposure, because these can change quickly based on policy announcements. The reports also show both sides using public messaging to shape expectations, including claims that the war is “terminated” alongside warnings that bombing could resume.

Conclusion

Iran’s military leadership has signalled that renewed conflict with the United States is “likely,” citing a lack of US commitment to agreements, while the US continues a naval blockade and rejects Iran’s latest negotiation proposal. With the ceasefire timeline and blockade conditions still central, the next visible milestones will be any formal decision on extending the ceasefire and any change in the Strait of Hormuz posture or blockade enforcement.