Trump Says U.S. Will Work With Iran’s New Leaders for a Lasting Peace Deal — and Will Remove Nuclear ‘Dust’

The Middle East woke up Wednesday to the most consequential diplomatic announcement in years. After nearly six weeks of U.S. and Israeli airstrikes, a Pakistan-brokered ceasefire paused one of the most dangerous conflicts since the Gulf War. But President Trump wasn’t done talking.

In an early-morning post on Truth Social, Trump declared that Iran had gone through “what will be a very productive Regime Change” and that the United States would now work with Tehran’s new leadership on a lasting peace. The centerpiece of that peace, he said, would be the total elimination of Iran’s nuclear capabilities — including the removal of radioactive debris, which he called “nuclear dust,” buried deep underground by B-2 stealth bombers.

This is a fast-moving story with enormous global implications. Here’s everything you need to know — from what “nuclear dust” actually means, to why the Strait of Hormuz controls oil prices worldwide, to whether this fragile truce will actually hold.

1. What Happened: The Ceasefire Announcement

The ceasefire almost didn’t happen. On Tuesday, April 7, Trump set a hard deadline: Iran had until 8:00 p.m. Eastern Time to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz — the narrow waterway through which roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil supply flows — or face “obliteration.” He threatened to destroy bridges, power plants, and other civilian infrastructure. Earlier that morning, he had posted on Truth Social that “a whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again.”

Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif stepped in as the key mediator. With 90 minutes to spare before Trump’s deadline, an agreement was reached. Iran agreed to reopen the strait. The U.S. agreed to suspend its bombing campaign for two weeks. Both sides called it a starting point, not an endpoint.

Trump then described Iran’s 10-point proposal as a “workable basis on which to negotiate.” The next morning, he added critical details: the U.S. would work with Iran on nuclear material removal, tariff relief, and sanctions relief, and — significantly — declared that Iran had already undergone regime change.

Why the Timing Mattered So Much

Iran had been blocking oil transit through the Strait of Hormuz since late February, when the U.S. and Israel launched coordinated strikes. The resulting supply shock sent global energy prices soaring. Every day the strait stayed closed cost oil-dependent economies billions of dollars. The ceasefire, imperfect as it is, immediately began to ease that pressure. MarineTraffic, an organization that monitors global shipping, confirmed vessel movement in the strait within hours of the announcement.

2. What Is ‘Nuclear Dust’ — and Why Does It Matter?

Trump’s phrase “nuclear dust” is unusual — and it’s not standard diplomatic or scientific language. But its meaning is fairly clear in context, and the underlying issue is very real.

In June 2025, seven B-2 stealth bombers dropped Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) bombs — the most powerful bunker-busters in the U.S. arsenal — on three of Iran’s most heavily fortified nuclear sites: Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. These underground facilities housed thousands of centrifuges used to enrich uranium. The strikes, part of what was called “Operation Midnight Hammer,” were designed to physically destroy those machines.

When a nuclear enrichment facility is bombed, the result is not simply rubble. It creates a mix of radioactive material — pulverized uranium compounds, contaminated equipment, and irradiated soil — buried under collapsed tunnels. That’s what Trump appears to be calling “nuclear dust.” He noted it has been “under very exacting Satellite Surveillance (Space Force!)” since the attacks, meaning the U.S. has been tracking the sites to ensure no material is moved.

In short, digging up the “nuclear dust” is Trump’s way of saying: the bombs destroyed the facilities, but the material still exists underground, and we intend to make sure Iran can’t recover it. It’s a concrete, physical demand — not just a diplomatic abstraction.

3. Trump’s Regime Change Claim: What Does It Mean?

Perhaps the most striking claim in Trump’s Truth Social posts is that Iran has undergone “regime change.” This needs unpacking. No democratic election has taken place. The Islamic Republic has not formally dissolved. So what is Trump actually saying?

The answer lies in the casualties from Operation Epic Fury, the second wave of coordinated U.S.-Israeli strikes launched on February 28, 2026. Those strikes targeted Iranian leadership, missile sites, and remaining nuclear-related facilities. According to multiple reports, early strikes killed Iran’s Supreme Leader as well as other top officials. The Iranian government structure has been significantly disrupted at its highest levels.

Trump has argued that the new officials now running Iran are more pragmatic. He wrote that “different, smarter, and less radicalized minds prevail” — people who, in his assessment, want to deal. Vice President JD Vance offered a more cautious view. He called the ceasefire a “fragile truce” and said its durability would depend on which camp within Iran wins out: those who want to negotiate, or those who are “lying about even the fragile truce that we’ve already struck.”

Not Everyone Agrees

Analysts at JPMorgan warned in a Monday client note that the conflict has actually strengthened Iran’s Revolutionary Guard — the hardline military wing that runs much of Iran’s security apparatus. They wrote that Iran’s strategy is built around outlasting, not outgunning, its opponents. “Iran may have lost its supreme leader and commanders, and suffered severe damage to nuclear facilities and military assets, but there are no signs of capitulation,” they noted.

4. Iran’s 10-Point Plan vs. the U.S. 15-Point Plan

One of the most confusing parts of the ceasefire is the competing sets of “points” being discussed. Here’s a breakdown.

Iran submitted a 10-point plan to the U.S. via Pakistan. Trump called it a “workable basis on which to negotiate.” But he also distanced himself from the version that leaked publicly, saying the real document was different and would be negotiated “behind closed doors.” This has created significant confusion over what was actually agreed to.

The United States, meanwhile, put forward its own 15-point proposal in late March. Iran has previously called several of its provisions “excessive.” Trump says many of those 15 points have already been agreed to.

As the table shows, the two plans are very far apart on core issues. The gap between them is why experts are treating this ceasefire as an opening — not a resolution.

5. Full Timeline: From Diplomacy to War to Ceasefire

6. The Strait of Hormuz: Why the Whole World Is Watching

If you’ve seen headlines about oil prices going haywire since late February, this is why. The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow waterway — at its tightest point, only about 21 miles wide — between Iran and Oman. Nearly 20% of the world’s entire oil and natural gas supply passes through it every day. Before the war, over 100 ships per day transited the strait.

When Iran began blocking or restricting traffic, it triggered what analysts described as a historic oil supply shock. The ripple effects hit consumers at gas pumps worldwide, raised shipping costs across the board, and rattled financial markets from New York to Tokyo.

One of Trump’s central demands throughout the conflict has been that the strait must be “free and open.” Iran, in its 10-point plan, proposed that it retain control over the waterway and charge a $2 million fee for every ship that passes through — a demand the U.S. rejected outright. The ceasefire’s fragile status was demonstrated almost immediately: after Israel continued strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon on April 8, Iran announced it had closed the strait again, at least temporarily.

7. What the Experts Are Saying

Reactions from foreign policy analysts range from cautious optimism to deep skepticism.

The Arms Control Association, a respected Washington-based think tank, has been sharply critical of how the Trump administration handled the lead-up to war. In a March 2026 analysis, they argued that U.S. negotiators entered talks ill-prepared and made contradictory demands — at one point agreeing that missiles were a “regional issue,” then reversing course and calling them an “imminent threat.” This inconsistency, they argued, damaged U.S. credibility and contributed to the breakdown of diplomacy.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a Republican hawk, expressed concern about Iran’s publicly leaked 10-point plan. He said allowing Iran to enrich uranium in any future deal “would be an affront to all those murdered by the regime since this war started.” He called for the administration to brief Congress on how a negotiated deal would meet U.S. national security objectives.

The Council on Foreign Relations noted that both the 10-point and 15-point plans contain “hard lines” for each country that make a full agreement difficult, but not impossible. Much depends on the Islamabad talks on April 10 and whether Iran’s new leadership holds firm or makes meaningful concessions.

8. What Happens Next: Islamabad and Beyond

Pakistani Prime Minister Sharif has invited delegations from both the U.S. and Iran to Islamabad on Friday, April 10, for “conclusive negotiations to settle all disputes.” Iran’s Supreme National Security Council has confirmed participation. The U.S. has indicated it is considering in-person talks but has not confirmed its delegation.

Vice President JD Vance and envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are expected to be involved. The White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt framed the moment as a product of military leverage: “The success of our military created maximum leverage, allowing President Trump and the team to engage in tough negotiations that have now created an opening for a diplomatic solution and long-term peace.”

Three Scenarios to Watch

Scenario 1 — A Comprehensive Deal: Both sides agree on nuclear dismantlement, sanctions relief, and a framework for normalizing relations. Highly ambitious. Requires Iran to accept zero enrichment, which it has repeatedly called a non-starter.

Scenario 2 — A Partial Agreement: The two sides agree on the Strait of Hormuz, some sanctions relief, and nuclear monitoring — deferring the hardest issues for later. Similar in structure to the 2015 JCPOA, which Trump himself abandoned in 2018.

Scenario 3 — Collapse: Talks in Islamabad break down. Iran closes the strait again. The U.S. resumes bombing. This is the scenario markets are most worried about.

9. People Also Ask: Frequently Asked Questions

10. Key Takeaways

This is one of the most consequential diplomatic moments since the original 2015 nuclear deal. The stakes couldn’t be higher: a failed peace process could restart military strikes, push Iran toward a nuclear weapon, and keep global oil markets in chaos. A successful deal could reshape the Middle East for a generation.

The world is watching Islamabad on Friday.

This article will be updated as the Islamabad talks develop. Bookmark this page for the latest analysis.