Nothing was actually signed. Trump had needed an excuse so he could claim he hadn’t been bluffing, thus claimed there was a deal. There were no negotiations.
On Wednesday, April 8th, updated at 5:52 pm ET, the Wall Street Journal headlined “A Closer Look at Iran’s 10 Demands — and Which the U.S. Might Accept: President Trump said the Iranian plan is a starting point”, and they reported:
In announcing a cease-fire with Iran, President Trump said Tuesday the U.S. had received a 10-point plan that was a “workable basis on which to negotiate.”
On Wednesday, Iranian state media released what Iran said that proposal was — a list that appeared to reflect many of the nation’s longstanding demands.
The White House said Wednesday that the list released by Iran wasn’t the basis for the cease-fire. White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters that Iran modified its original proposal and put forward a more reasonable and condensed plan that made it possible for the U.S. to agree to the cease-fire. [That ‘more reasonable and condensed plan’ — if it actually existed — was not published anywhere; so, Leavitt’s allegation there could be fictitious.]
Mediators [unidentified — but as of now, there is no credible, verifiable reporting that identifies any recognized ceasefire plan released on April 8, 2026 along with confirmed mediators; so, that part of her allegation also might be fictitious] said late Wednesday that Iran had made a number of concessions on its original list, including softening its positions on the withdrawal of U.S. troops from the region, war reparations and nuclear enrichment.
Iran didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment. Its state media repeatedly posted its version of the proposal Wednesday. [In other words: as-of 5:52 pm ET on 8 April 2026],
Here is the list released by Iran …
2. Iran will continue to control the Strait of Hormuz …
3. Accepting an Iranian right to enrich uranium …
4. Lifting of all primary sanctions …
5. Lifting of all secondary sanctions …
6. Termination of all Security Council resolutions …
7. Termination of all IAEA Board of Governors resolutions …
8. Payment of reparations to Iran …
9. Withdrawal of U.S. combat forces from the region …
10. Cease-fires on all fronts, including against Hezbollah in Lebanon …
Even as-of today, Iran has never confirmed that there were or would be any negotiations — either mediated or direct — with Trump or his representatives. In fact, after being ambushed — in the midst of negotiations with Trump’s representatives —by Trump’s bombing of Iran in June 2025, Iranian government officials made multiple explicit statements denying that they would ever again be negotiating with Trump or his representatives. These denials have been frequent, public, and came from several senior figures. Iran’s list of 10 demands on April 8th were not being “proposed” but demanded. They were demanded at 5:52 PM on the very day when at 8:00 PM that evening — barely two hours later — were to commence Trump’s promised elimination of Iran: “A whole civilization will die tonight.” Trump issued this warning. In other words, this list by Iran was not a proposal but a declaration that Iran would require these 10 demands to be met before there would ever again be negotiations of any sort with Trump, no matter what. They were calling his bluff, and they were willing to accept the consequences if he was not bluffing — and would respond appropriately.
Also on April 8th, the Financial Times bannered “White House pushed Pakistan to broker temporary Iran ceasefire: Idea for pause in fighting originated from Donald Trump’s team even as he escalated threats against Iran”:
The White House pushed the idea of a temporary ceasefire with Iran even as Donald Trump escalated threats against the Islamic republic and claimed it was “begging” for a deal, according to people familiar with the talks.
For weeks the Trump administration was leaning on Islamabad to convince the Iranians to agree a pause in fighting where it would reopen the Strait of Hormuz, the people said. Pakistan’s crucial role, as a Muslim-majority neighbour and intermediary, was to sell it to Tehran.
The back-channel efforts led by Pakistan’s military strongman Asim Munir culminated on Tuesday night in the announcement by the US, Iran and Israel of a two-week ceasefire, hours after Trump had threatened to destroy Iran’s “whole civilisation” if Iran didn’t meet his terms.
Trump, yet again, was trying to lie his way to success.
However, finally, on April 10th, Iran seems to have caved. The AP headlined “Pakistan prime minister says US, Iranian delegations set for peace talks in Islamabad”.
Furthermore, also on April 10th, the New York Post headlined “Trump tells The Post he’s preparing military if Iran fails to comply in talks: ‘We’re loading up the ships’”. Trump was quoted:
“We’re going to find out in about 24 hours. We’re going to know soon,” “We have a reset going. We’re loading up the ships with the best ammunition, the best weapons ever made — even better than what we did previously and we blew them apart,” “But we’re loading up the ships. We’re loading up the ships with the best weapons ever made, even at a higher level than we use to do a complete decimation. And if we don’t have a deal, we will be using them, and we will be using them very effectively.” “To our face, they’re getting rid of all nuclear weapons, everything’s gone. And then they go out to the press and say, ‘No, we’d like to enrich.’ So we’ll find out.” “You’re dealing against people that we don’t know whether or not they tell the truth.”
There are two key differences between standard coercive diplomacy and Trump’s publicly-made threats to annihilate a country for resisting his demands. First, these annihilationist threats are being made publicly, not privately; this makes the opponent far less likely to comply with those demands, because to do so would humiliate that ruler in front of his/her own nation. Second, such threats are generally seen as escalatory, risky, and counterproductive if the goal is a negotiated settlement.
Furthermore, when the WSJ on April 8th reported that “President Trump said Tuesday the U.S. had received a 10-point plan that was a ‘workable basis on which to negotiate.’” and now he is virtually screaming to the N.Y. Post that it’s not, and that instead Iran’s demands must be dropped — and dropped right away — or else he will “do a complete decimation” of their country, he is yet again demanding of Iran not a negotiation but a surrender — OR ELSE.
Consequently: if Iran’s leaders will actually show up to ‘negotiate’ with Trump’s people, after he has publicly spoken that way, they not only are publicly displaying that their prior public promise NOT to do so was a lie, but they are effectively surrendering in advance of those ‘negotiations’. Are they that stupid?
Comments