Breaking

Trump extends Iran ceasefire, says move came after request from Pakistan’s Munir and Shehbaz

Mabruka Khan
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: President Donald Trump said Tuesday he was extending the ceasefire with Iran until Tehran’s leadership produces what he called a “unified proposal,” adding that the decision came at the request of Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. In a post cited by multiple outlets, Trump said the United States would hold off on further attacks on Iran while waiting for its leaders and representatives to come forward with a common negotiating position. The wording was striking, and not just because Trump publicly named both Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership. It underlined something that has been building for days: Pakistan is now firmly at the center of efforts to keep the U.S.-Iran track from collapsing altogether. AP reported that the original two-week truce had been due to expire Wednesday, while Islamabad was still trying to salvage another round of talks. That does not mean the crisis is close to being resolved. CBS reported that Trump extended the deadline even as uncertainty persisted over whether Iran would actually rejoin negotiations in Islamabad. The same coverage said Vice President JD Vance was expected to lead a U.S. negotiating team if talks resume, but Iranian participation remained unclear. So, in practical terms, Trump’s announcement buys time, not peace. It keeps the ceasefire alive a little longer and gives mediators room to work, but it also puts the burden squarely on Tehran. Washington is now signaling that the next move must come from Iran, and not in fragments. It wants one proposal, one line, one negotiating position. For Pakistan, the statement is politically important. Trump did not refer vaguely to “regional partners” or “friendly governments.” He named Munir and Shehbaz directly, which effectively credits Islamabad with helping prevent the immediate collapse of the truce. That is a notable diplomatic moment for Pakistan, especially as it tries to present itself as a serious intermediary rather than a bystander in a fast-moving regional conflict. Still, the pause looks fragile. AP said Iran had been hesitant to resume talks, and broader tensions were still high, including pressure around maritime routes and continued military signaling. So the extension should be read less as a breakthrough and more as a last-minute reprieve. The guns may stay quiet for now, but only because diplomacy has been given one more narrow opening. The immediate question now is simple: will Iran answer with a workable proposal, or will this ceasefire become just another temporary halt before the next round of escalation? That answer, more than Trump’s announcement itself, will decide whether this episode is remembered as the start of real negotiations or merely a delay in renewed conflict.
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: President Donald Trump said Tuesday he was extending the ceasefire with Iran until Tehran’s leadership produces what he called a “unified proposal,” adding that the decision came at the request of Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. In a post cited by multiple outlets, Trump said the United States would hold off on further attacks on Iran while waiting for its leaders and representatives to come forward with a common negotiating position. The wording was striking, and not just because Trump publicly named both Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership. It underlined something that has been building for days: Pakistan is now firmly at the center of efforts to keep the U.S.-Iran track from collapsing altogether. AP reported that the original two-week truce had been due to expire Wednesday, while Islamabad was still trying to salvage another round of talks. That does not mean the crisis is close to being resolved. CBS reported that Trump extended the deadline even as uncertainty persisted over whether Iran would actually rejoin negotiations in Islamabad. The same coverage said Vice President JD Vance was expected to lead a U.S. negotiating team if talks resume, but Iranian participation remained unclear. So, in practical terms, Trump’s announcement buys time, not peace. It keeps the ceasefire alive a little longer and gives mediators room to work, but it also puts the burden squarely on Tehran. Washington is now signaling that the next move must come from Iran, and not in fragments. It wants one proposal, one line, one negotiating position. For Pakistan, the statement is politically important. Trump did not refer vaguely to “regional partners” or “friendly governments.” He named Munir and Shehbaz directly, which effectively credits Islamabad with helping prevent the immediate collapse of the truce. That is a notable diplomatic moment for Pakistan, especially as it tries to present itself as a serious intermediary rather than a bystander in a fast-moving regional conflict. Still, the pause looks fragile. AP said Iran had been hesitant to resume talks, and broader tensions were still high, including pressure around maritime routes and continued military signaling. So the extension should be read less as a breakthrough and more as a last-minute reprieve. The guns may stay quiet for now, but only because diplomacy has been given one more narrow opening. The immediate question now is simple: will Iran answer with a workable proposal, or will this ceasefire become just another temporary halt before the next round of escalation? That answer, more than Trump’s announcement itself, will decide whether this episode is remembered as the start of real negotiations or merely a delay in renewed conflict.

WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: President Donald Trump said Tuesday he was extending the ceasefire with Iran until Tehran’s leadership produces what he called a “unified proposal,” adding that the decision came at the request of Pakistan’s Field Marshal Asim Munir and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif. In a post cited by multiple outlets, Trump said the United States would hold off on further attacks on Iran while waiting for its leaders and representatives to come forward with a common negotiating position.

The wording was striking, and not just because Trump publicly named both Pakistan’s civilian and military leadership. It underlined something that has been building for days: Pakistan is now firmly at the center of efforts to keep the U.S.-Iran track from collapsing altogether. AP reported that the original two-week truce had been due to expire Wednesday, while Islamabad was still trying to salvage another round of talks.

That does not mean the crisis is close to being resolved. CBS reported that Trump extended the deadline even as uncertainty persisted over whether Iran would actually rejoin negotiations in Islamabad. The same coverage said Vice President JD Vance was expected to lead a U.S. negotiating team if talks resume, but Iranian participation remained unclear.

So, in practical terms, Trump’s announcement buys time, not peace. It keeps the ceasefire alive a little longer and gives mediators room to work, but it also puts the burden squarely on Tehran. Washington is now signaling that the next move must come from Iran, and not in fragments. It wants one proposal, one line, one negotiating position.

For Pakistan, the statement is politically important. Trump did not refer vaguely to “regional partners” or “friendly governments.” He named Munir and Shehbaz directly, which effectively credits Islamabad with helping prevent the immediate collapse of the truce. That is a notable diplomatic moment for Pakistan, especially as it tries to present itself as a serious intermediary rather than a bystander in a fast-moving regional conflict.

Still, the pause looks fragile. AP said Iran had been hesitant to resume talks, and broader tensions were still high, including pressure around maritime routes and continued military signaling. So the extension should be read less as a breakthrough and more as a last-minute reprieve. The guns may stay quiet for now, but only because diplomacy has been given one more narrow opening.

The immediate question now is simple: will Iran answer with a workable proposal, or will this ceasefire become just another temporary halt before the next round of escalation? That answer, more than Trump’s announcement itself, will decide whether this episode is remembered as the start of real negotiations or merely a delay in renewed conflict.

Share This Article
Previous Article WASHINGTON: UnitedHealth has warned that the Trump administration’s planned Medicare obesity-drug pilot faces “notable challenges,” casting doubt over how smoothly the program can move ahead if major insurers stay cautious. Recent market reporting said the model depends heavily on participation from Medicare drug plans that cover most Part D enrollees, which makes the stance of large insurers especially important. The concern centers on a broader CMS effort to expand access to GLP-1 weight-loss medicines for seniors. Under CMS’s published framework, the longer-term BALANCE Model would begin in Medicare Part D in January 2027, while a temporary Medicare GLP-1 Bridge is designed to start earlier and give eligible beneficiaries short-term access before that main model begins. What makes this a little more complicated is that the short-term bridge and the longer pilot are not the same thing. CMS says the Medicare GLP-1 Bridge operates outside the normal Part D coverage and payment flow, meaning Part D sponsors are not directly involved in that bridge arrangement. In other words, insurer participation is a much bigger issue for the 2027 BALANCE rollout than for the bridge itself. That distinction matters because investors and drugmakers are watching this closely. Reports said shares of obesity-drug makers fell after UnitedHealth’s comments, largely because Medicare coverage is seen as a huge growth opportunity for drugs such as Wegovy and Zepbound. If major insurers hesitate, the program could struggle to achieve the scale CMS appears to want. There is already some evidence of resistance. MarketWatch reported that CVS Health has opted out, while UnitedHealth is still evaluating the structure and discussing possible changes with Medicare officials. That does not mean the program is dead, not yet anyway, but it does suggest the administration may need to revise the design or sweeten the terms if it wants broader insurer buy-in. The bigger backdrop here is cost. Medicare has long been wary of broad obesity-drug coverage because GLP-1 therapies are expensive and potentially involve very large patient populations. Earlier policy debates around these drugs were shaped by concerns that wide coverage could drive up federal spending sharply, even as supporters argued the medicines could reduce longer-term health costs tied to obesity. So the headline problem for CMS is pretty straightforward: it has created a short-term bridge that can move without direct Part D plan involvement, but the more ambitious long-term Medicare model still appears to need insurers on board. UnitedHealth’s warning does not shut the door, but it does signal that one of the industry’s biggest players thinks the current setup may not be ready for easy launch. UnitedHealth raises red flags over Medicare obesity-drug pilot
Next Article Trump reportedly weighs Congo option for Afghans who helped U.S. forces Trump reportedly weighs Congo option for Afghans who helped U.S. forces
Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Sponsored Ads

Stay Connected

Trump reportedly weighs Congo option for Afghans who helped U.S. forces
Trump reportedly weighs Congo option for Afghans who helped U.S. forces
international
WASHINGTON: UnitedHealth has warned that the Trump administration’s planned Medicare obesity-drug pilot faces “notable challenges,” casting doubt over how smoothly the program can move ahead if major insurers stay cautious. Recent market reporting said the model depends heavily on participation from Medicare drug plans that cover most Part D enrollees, which makes the stance of large insurers especially important. The concern centers on a broader CMS effort to expand access to GLP-1 weight-loss medicines for seniors. Under CMS’s published framework, the longer-term BALANCE Model would begin in Medicare Part D in January 2027, while a temporary Medicare GLP-1 Bridge is designed to start earlier and give eligible beneficiaries short-term access before that main model begins. What makes this a little more complicated is that the short-term bridge and the longer pilot are not the same thing. CMS says the Medicare GLP-1 Bridge operates outside the normal Part D coverage and payment flow, meaning Part D sponsors are not directly involved in that bridge arrangement. In other words, insurer participation is a much bigger issue for the 2027 BALANCE rollout than for the bridge itself. That distinction matters because investors and drugmakers are watching this closely. Reports said shares of obesity-drug makers fell after UnitedHealth’s comments, largely because Medicare coverage is seen as a huge growth opportunity for drugs such as Wegovy and Zepbound. If major insurers hesitate, the program could struggle to achieve the scale CMS appears to want. There is already some evidence of resistance. MarketWatch reported that CVS Health has opted out, while UnitedHealth is still evaluating the structure and discussing possible changes with Medicare officials. That does not mean the program is dead, not yet anyway, but it does suggest the administration may need to revise the design or sweeten the terms if it wants broader insurer buy-in. The bigger backdrop here is cost. Medicare has long been wary of broad obesity-drug coverage because GLP-1 therapies are expensive and potentially involve very large patient populations. Earlier policy debates around these drugs were shaped by concerns that wide coverage could drive up federal spending sharply, even as supporters argued the medicines could reduce longer-term health costs tied to obesity. So the headline problem for CMS is pretty straightforward: it has created a short-term bridge that can move without direct Part D plan involvement, but the more ambitious long-term Medicare model still appears to need insurers on board. UnitedHealth’s warning does not shut the door, but it does signal that one of the industry’s biggest players thinks the current setup may not be ready for easy launch.
UnitedHealth raises red flags over Medicare obesity-drug pilot
Headline Health
COVID shots, newer vaccines in limbo after US court halts Kennedy’s advisory panel
Health
WASHINGTON/ISLAMABAD: President Donald Trump said the ceasefire with Iran could remain in place until Tehran submits proposals and negotiations are wrapped up, though the latest reporting suggests the truce is still shaky and could unravel quickly if talks stall. AP reported Tuesday that the current two-week ceasefire was due to expire Wednesday, with U.S. and Iranian officials signaling possible new talks in Islamabad even as both sides warned they were ready to resume fighting without a deal. The line from Trump adds a bit of breathing room, at least on paper. CBS reported that he indicated the ceasefire would continue until discussions are concluded, but the same round of coverage also showed growing uncertainty over whether Iran would actually send a delegation for the next phase of talks in Pakistan. By Tuesday evening in Pakistan, officials were still waiting for formal confirmation from Tehran. That uncertainty has become the real story now. While Trump has publicly said senior U.S. officials, including Vice President JD Vance and envoy Steve Witkoff, are heading to Pakistan for another possible round of negotiations, Iranian officials have pushed back against the idea of negotiating under pressure. Recent reporting says Tehran has not officially confirmed participation, and Iranian public messaging has stressed that talks cannot proceed under threats or coercion. Pakistan, meanwhile, has emerged as the central mediator in this phase of the crisis. Multiple recent reports say Islamabad has been trying to keep the ceasefire alive and host a second round of U.S.-Iran talks, following earlier efforts that helped open a diplomatic channel after the fighting. That mediation role has given Pakistan unusual visibility in a conflict that has rattled the wider region and raised fears over shipping and energy security. Still, nobody seems to be pretending this is settled. AP described the talks as uncertain on the eve of the ceasefire deadline, while other live updates showed that the next meeting could be delayed or even collapse if Iran refuses to attend. That leaves Trump’s statement looking less like a firm peace breakthrough and more like a conditional extension: the guns stay quiet a little longer, but only if diplomacy starts moving. The main pressure point remains whether Tehran will put forward terms both sides can work with. Earlier reporting said Trump had treated an Iranian 10-point plan as a possible basis for negotiations, but key sticking points remain unresolved, including broader security demands and the terms of any longer-term settlement. So for now, the ceasefire is alive, yes, but it’s living hour to hour. That is why Trump’s latest remark matters. It signals he is willing to keep the pause in place a bit longer, yet it also makes clear that Washington wants something concrete from Tehran, not just more delay. Whether Iran responds with proposals, or with another refusal, will probably decide whether this fragile ceasefire becomes a negotiation track or slips back into open conflict.
Trump says Iran ceasefire can continue, but only until Tehran puts forward proposals
international
Nawaz pitches development as PML-N gears up for Gilgit-Baltistan vote
Nawaz pitches development as PML-N gears up for Gilgit-Baltistan vote
Politics
Iran Tensions Rise: Vance’s Talks Trip Paused for Now
Headline

You Might Also Like