United States Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced on Tuesday that Operation Epic Fury – the US-Israeli strikes on Iran that began on February 28 and escalated into a regional conflict – has concluded, having achieved its stated objectives. Washington now favors “the path of peace,” Rubio told reporters.
On the same day, US President Donald Trump declared that “Project Freedom,” a US military operation launched just the day before to escort stranded ships out of the Strait of Hormuz, had been paused.
However, in a social media post on Wednesday, Trump appeared to contradict Rubio’s definitive stance, stating that Epic Fury would “be at an end” only if Iran “agrees to give what has been agreed to.” Otherwise, Trump warned, “the bombing starts, and it will be, sadly, at a much higher level and intensity than it was before.”
This raises a critical question: Is the US-Israel conflict with Iran truly over? We delve into the rapidly shifting US rhetoric to understand the situation.
What Did Rubio Say About Operation Epic Fury?
During a White House media briefing on Tuesday, Secretary Rubio confirmed the cessation of Operation Epic Fury.
“The Operation Epic Fury is concluded. We achieved the objectives of that operation,” Rubio stated.
He added, “We’re not cheering for an additional situation to occur. We would prefer the path of peace. What the president would prefer is a deal,” referencing Pakistan’s ongoing efforts to facilitate direct talks between Iran and the US. The initial round of these discussions in Islamabad last month concluded without a resolution, though both sides have since submitted new proposals.
Burcu Ozcelik, a senior research fellow for Middle East security at the UK-based think tank Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), told Al Jazeera that the “on-again, off-again talks with Iran, alongside Trump’s abrupt about-turn on ‘Operation Freedom’ to guide vessels out of the Strait of Hormuz has created unwelcome frenzy in the Gulf.”
Ozcelik further explained that this reflects “the highly fraught and almost frantic diplomatic backchannelling aimed to extract deep concessions from Tehran on the nuclear issue that will lock in commitments that exceed previous conditions, and which will convince the US to lift the blockade on Iranian ports and unlock sanctions relief – thereby effectively ending the war.”
Iran, on its part, seeks guarantees that any agreement would signify a definitive end to the conflict, not merely a temporary pause.
What Did Trump Say About Project Freedom?
On the same day, President Trump informed reporters that Project Freedom had been paused “based on the request” of Pakistan and other nations, and due to “Great Progress” made toward a “Complete and Final Agreement” with Iranian representatives.
Project Freedom was a US forces operation, announced by Trump the day prior, intended to escort stranded ships through the Strait of Hormuz. This operation had been perceived as a direct challenge to Iran’s closure of the strategic waterway, which normally handles 20 percent of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) supplies. Iran’s warnings against ships in the strait had effectively blockaded it since the US-Israel actions against Iran began, further intensified by a US naval blockade on Iranian ports.
Following Trump’s announcement of Project Freedom, Iran stated that ships attempting to use the strait without permission from the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) would face fire, sparking fears of renewed conflict. This triggered a war of words, with claims and counterclaims of strikes throughout the day.
Initially, Iran’s Fars agency claimed it had struck a US warship with drones after it disregarded orders to turn back. US Central Command (CENTCOM) denied any US ship was hit, instead claiming to have sunk at least six IRGC vessels, which Iran denied. Tehran then published a new map extending its claimed area of control over the strait into UAE waters, raising concerns of a new regional confrontation. The UAE also accused Iran of launching strikes on its Fujairah port, leading to a fire at an oil refinery.
On Tuesday, the US operation was halted, as confirmed by Trump. He wrote on his Truth Social platform: “We have mutually agreed that, while the [US] Blockade will remain in full force and effect, Project Freedom (The Movement of Ships through the Strait of Hormuz) will be paused for a short period of time to see whether or not the Agreement can be finalized and signed.” Iran has yet to officially respond.
Shahram Akbarzadeh, a professor in Middle East and Central Asian politics at Australia’s Deakin University, suggested to Al Jazeera that while Trump’s exact motivations for pausing Project Freedom are unclear, it coincides with growing anti-war sentiment in the US.
“At the same time, Trump may be losing patience with the war; he says he has time to drag this out,” Akbarzadeh noted. “But in reality, Trump has a short attention span and needs to secure a win – soon. Pausing Project Freedom allows diplomacy to pick up pace, bringing US and Iran closer to a deal that Trump would label as a win.”
Is This the End of the War on Iran?
Not entirely. Akbarzadeh believes that pausing Project Freedom “could serve as the beginning of the end for the war.”
“We know that the Iranians are desperate for an end, so there is little chance of them resuming attacks on US Navy if Trump sends explicit signals that diplomacy has a green light,” he said.
However, he cautioned, “The problem is that we have been here before. Earlier opportunities were squandered because Israel insisted that the US could get a better deal or because Trump misread the situation and expected the military option to grant him more concessions.”
What Happens Next?
Predicting the future remains challenging, but neither side appears to desire a return to full-scale war, suggesting a diplomatic resolution is likely to be prioritized, according to Akbarzadeh. Still, he added, “neither can afford to be seen as the loser. They feel their public image needs to be preserved for their own respective domestic audience. This complicates negotiations and reaching a deal.”
Ozcelik stated that what unfolds next “will be determined by what the fractured leadership in Tehran commits to on the nuclear file.” She noted that while Iran has publicly rejected talks involving curbs on its nuclear program, such posturing aims to appease domestic hard-liners and nationalists who view nuclear issues from a sovereign rights perspective, especially after the US-Israel actions.
Ozcelik predicted that the United Nations might soon issue a formal condemnation of Iran for unilaterally blockading the Strait of Hormuz. She concluded, “But the real pressure, mounting by the day, is the economic one – that shutting the strait is imposing punishing costs on Iran’s economic recovery prospects. Despite rhetoric on resilience and survival, the remaining Iranian leadership is undeniably concerned about the costs of the war. The possibility of renewed military strikes against Iranian critical infrastructure and the destabilizing impacts these would inevitably have might be finally forcing Tehran’s hand.”
#IranConflict #EpicFury #ProjectFreedom #USDiplomacy #MiddleEast #StraitOfHormuz #Geopolitics #PeaceTalks #InternationalRelations #TrumpRubio
Leave a Reply