Fragile ceasefire: Israel remains the "troublemaker", Trump is still "flip-flopping"

The ink on the ceasefire hasn’t dried, yet bombs are already falling.

On the evening of April 7th, Eastern Time, Trump announced on social media a suspension of airstrikes against Iran for two weeks. This decision came less than 90 minutes before his self-imposed "final ultimatum" deadline. Global markets quickly rebounded—US stocks surged, Brent crude dropped by over 13% in a single day, falling below 95 dollars per barrel.

However, less than 24 hours later, the situation shifted sharply. Israel launched its largest airstrike against Lebanon since the current conflict began, and Iran immediately announced the suspension of oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Meanwhile, Trump made contradictory statements on the core issues of the ceasefire provisions, leaving the public unable to determine the actual content of the agreement.

This ceasefire has been chaotic from the start.

Trump’s Mixed Signals: Several Versions in One Night

The morning after the ceasefire agreement was reached, the signals from the White House confused the public.

Trump continued his trademark "governing via social media" and "TACO" style, posting a series of messages at dawn about the Strait of Hormuz, Iranian nuclear material, tariffs, and sanctions. However, these messages were filled with ambiguity or incomplete claims.

The central disagreement is: What is the basis for negotiations?

The previous night, Trump had clearly stated that Iran’s "10-point plan" was a "viable foundation" for negotiations, and claimed "nearly all previously disputed points have been agreed upon."

But only a few hours later, his stance shifted. Trump instead emphasized that the American "15-point plan" would be the basis for further talks, and insisted "many points of the 15-point plan have been agreed"—despite Iran’s clear rejection of this plan.

The divisions within the White House are even more pronounced. Press Secretary Caroline Levitt directly criticized Iran's proposal to reporters: "Iran’s initial proposal is unserious, unacceptable, and has been entirely discarded—it was literally thrown in the trash by President Trump and American negotiators." She added: "It’s utterly absurd to think President Trump would accept Iran’s wish list as an agreement."

This creates a major logical gap: The president says Iran’s plan is the basis, the press secretary says it's in the trash.

For financial markets, such uncertainty is fatal. As Dennis Ross, former U.S. Middle East envoy under President Clinton, said: "These two weeks are likely to be full of twists. It’s important to clearly ask what commitments both sides have really made."

In addition to confusion over negotiation terms, Trump proposed some new ideas that shocked the markets. He suggested cooperating with Tehran to "remove" its nuclear material, even proposing a joint venture to charge passage fees to ships through the Strait of Hormuz. He also threatened a 50% tariff on countries supplying weapons to Iran.

However, a prior Supreme Court decision has greatly restricted the president’s power to impose tariffs quickly. Such unrealistic remarks further intensify doubts about the coherence of US policy.

Israel's "Serial Bombings": Exploiting Gaps in the Agreement

If the White House's confusion is a hidden risk to the ceasefire, Israel’s actions ignited the fuse directly.

When Trump initially announced the ceasefire, he only specified that attacks on Iran should stop, leaving a critical loophole: Lebanon. Lebanon represents the other main front between Israel and Hezbollah, which is supported by Iran.

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu seized on this loophole, openly stating Israel supported the two-week ceasefire with Iran but insisted "the ceasefire does not include Lebanon."

Israeli Defense Forces then launched highly destructive actions. According to Xinhua, on April 8th afternoon, the Israeli military carried out simultaneous airstrikes on over 100 targets in Beirut, Bekaa Valley, and southern Lebanon within just 10 minutes.

This was the largest Israeli strike inside Lebanon since the U.S.-Israel conflict with Iran began. The airstrikes had severe consequences: in one day, at least 254 people were killed and 1,165 injured. Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Salam subsequently declared April 9 a day of national mourning.

Netanyahu made a prime-time speech that evening, maintaining a hard stance: "We still have goals to achieve, and we will achieve them either through agreements or by resuming war... Our fingers are always on the trigger."

Israel's logic is clear: use the US-Iran ceasefire window to concentrate military resources and deliver devastating blows to Iran's proxies (Hezbollah).

But this move directly undermines mediation consensus. As mediator for the ceasefire, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz explicitly stated that the ceasefire "covers all areas including Lebanon and others, and takes effect immediately." French President Macron urgently called the leaders of the US, Iran, and Lebanon, stressing "the ceasefire must include Lebanon," otherwise the airstrikes would directly threaten the sustainability of the ceasefire.

For the US, how to "manage Israel" may be a headache. Since the Iran war began, rumors that Israel ‘controls’ Trump have been rampant.

A Bloomberg commodities and energy reporter commented: "So far, (managing Israel) has been quite difficult for the White House. Israel’s attacks against Lebanon could disrupt the entire ceasefire process before any direct US-Iran negotiations begin."

Faced with pressure from all sides, Xinhua reported that, in an interview with PBS, Trump lightly handled the contradiction. He confirmed Lebanon wasn’t covered by the ceasefire, explaining "because of Hezbollah." When asked if this would undermine the agreement, Trump said: "That’s another separate conflict; that will be dealt with later. It’s okay."

Iran’s Bottom Line and Countermeasures: The Chokehold Effect of Hormuz

To Trump’s "it’s okay," Iran responded with "it’s very much not okay."

Iran considers Lebanon an inseparable part of the "Axis of Resistance." Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Baghaei strongly condemned Israel’s airstrikes as blatant violations of the ceasefire and emphasized that the US bears direct responsibility. According to Xinhua, Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi even publicly challenged Washington on social media: "America must choose between the ceasefire and ‘continuing the war through Israel’—it can’t have both."

Iran didn’t stop at verbal warnings. Reports indicate that, in response to Israel’s airstrikes in Lebanon, Iran’s state media said Iran has already stopped two oil tankers from passing through the Strait of Hormuz.

The Strait of Hormuz is a vital hub for global energy, handling about one-fifth of worldwide oil supply. Under the ceasefire agreement, Iran was supposed to allow free passage of ships, which was Trump’s urgent goal for calming US oil prices.

Although White House press secretary Levitt denied the closure, saying "traffic through the strait increased today," market concerns have not eased.

Iranian parliament speaker Kalibaf listed three key provisions that the US had already violated before talks even began:

1. Failure to achieve a ceasefire in Lebanon.
2. A drone entered Iranian airspace and was shot down in Fars Province.
3. Denial of Iran’s right to enrich uranium (the sixth clause in the "10-point plan").

Kalibaf bluntly said: "Now, this negotiation framework has already been blatantly violated before US-Iran talks even begin. Under these circumstances, neither a ceasefire nor negotiations make sense."

Iranian Supreme Leader’s military advisor Mohsen Rezaei was even more direct. He said America must accept Iran’s ten-point plan as the basis, but "the armed forces’ fingers stay on the trigger until we are fully sure national interests are protected."

Additionally, Iran sent a signal that greatly alarmed the global shipping industry. Tehran hinted that to maintain control over the Strait of Hormuz, it may require tankers to pay transit fees with cryptocurrency in the future. This is a direct challenge to dollar dominance—and a new sword hanging over global supply chains.

The Account Book Behind the Compromise: Why Did America Brake Now?

In this unpredictable game, investors' main concern is: Given such large differences, why did Trump hit the brakes now?

The answer is hidden in the reality of economic and political calculations.

Militarily, the US paid a hefty price. In the 40-day airstrikes, Iran showed strong resilience. American jets were damaged, high-value assets like early warning radars destroyed, and massive munitions were spent. Defense Secretary Haggses may proclaim the ceasefire as Washington’s "overwhelming victory," but in reality, the US military is bogged down.

The economic backlash is even deadlier. War sent US domestic gasoline prices almost 40% higher. Moody’s Chief Economist Mark Zandi warned high oil prices would push the US economy into recession.

Politically, Trump is facing internal fractures. His approval rating fell to a low of 35%, and the Republican Party is worried soaring oil prices could bring "catastrophic failure" in the midterms. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said bluntly: "I’m glad Trump backed down, and he’s desperately looking for a way out from his absurd bluster."

James Acton, Senior Fellow with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, analyzed that the US accepting a proposal which doesn’t restrict Iran’s nuclear program but grants control over the Strait of Hormuz as the negotiating basis is essentially "a huge concession."

The two-week countdown has begun. Vice President Vance is expected to lead a delegation to Islamabad, Pakistan, for face-to-face talks with Iranian Parliament Speaker Kalibaf’s team.

Yet, as Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security, said, Iran’s ten-point proposal "reads like a wish list drafted by Tehran before the war." The gap between offers is vast.

A ceasefire does not equal peace. With White House hesitations, Israel’s fierce bombardment, and Iran’s uncompromising bottom line, this two-week ceasefire looks more like a brief pause before the next, bigger storm.

Risk disclaimer and termsThe market has risks, investment needs caution. This article does not constitute individual investment advice, nor does it consider the special investment goals, financial situations, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether the opinions, views, or conclusions in this article suit their particular circumstances. Investing accordingly is at your own risk.