Update(1315): The American side is keeping up the illusion of progress on Iran talks, even as Tehran has once again on Wednesday confirmed no direct meeting has taken in place in Doha - nor are there plans for direct dialogue, its deputy FM has said. President Trump has simultaneously hailed "very good" talks on Iran in Doha - apparently just referencing envoys Witkoff and Kushner merely dialoguing with third country intermediaries. 

On the same day, Vice President JD Vance played a little 'bad cop' - warning that if Iran fails to acquiesce and destabilizes the region that the US could respond, escalating in several ways. "If Iran attempts to rebuild its nuclear program, threaten its neighbors and support terrorism, President Trump has options to deal with it," Vance said, without specifying further. Earlier the WSJ stated that Trump had been briefed on several military options - including 'all-out war'; however, the US president is said to want to give diplomacy more time.

Vance additionally stated that the US "dropped bombs on Iran because it fired on ships, and we used leverage to ensure safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz" - and suggested this could be done again. He also mentioned that current indirect Doha talks are "to discuss the details and flow of maritime traffic." According to more:

Iran has meanwhile consistently denied that it is pursuing nuclear weapons, but very likely many IRGC hardliners are calling for just that.

On the Hormuz front, the US believes it is regaining leverage:

*  *  *

President Trump started this week by claiming that Iran had "requested" direct talks in Qatar, but as of yet the ground reality in Doha is that Iranian officials have refused, leaving US representatives Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to just bide their time and deal with Qatari and Pakistani intermediaries.

In this context of Tehran putting direct contacts on hold, Trump has reportedly been briefed on options for a possible return to broader war with Iran, but has for now opted to continue diplomatic negotiations, according to a report by the Wall Street Journal citing admin officials.

The late Monday report described that discussions on "all-out war" planning involved War Secretary Pete Hegseth and Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Dan Caine, with the focus of the briefing described as assessing whether the United States should abandon talks with Tehran and resume full-scale military strikes. The Journal characterized, citing the officials, the latter option as—

While Trump is said to be leaning toward diplomacy, the report suggests he had not made a final decision yet, as new large-scale strikes would certainly destroy already fragile negotiations.

The WSJ further specified the president has told advisers he is ready to allow nuclear negotiations with Tehran to extend beyond an August 18 deadline, giving breathing room and flexibility for talks to produce real results.

It should be noted that the Pentagon and US intelligence community routinely present 'options' for the Commander-in-Chief:

Central sticking points remain the initial release of $6 billion in Iranian frozen assets, and the question of tolls or fees for Hormuz Strait passage. The US side has yet to see enough good behavior from Iran to release the funds - but perhaps the administration is more worried about domestic criticism from the hawks. Neither side has found agreement for moving forward.

In the meantime so-called hardliners within Iran are putting pressure on their negotiators to make Washington 'pay' if it won't honor its agreements outlined in the MoU. As geopolitical blog Moon of Alabama has laid out:

The Assembly's statement from just days stated in part, "In accordance with the commitment of the respected officials to the leadership and the people, it is expected that any breach of the agreement and violation of the clauses of the memorandum of understanding will be responded to immediately."

The Iranian Foreign Minister's own rhetoric has grown more pointed and heated at this point:

So far, the White House has tended to ignore such strong rhetoric coming from Araghchi - again, likely not willing to damage negotiations all based on some social media tit-for-tat exchanges.

But all of this without doubt demonstrates that Tehran won't so easily bend, and the two sides could be headed toward more direct clashes as absolutist demands and interpretations keep being presented.