Over the past few years, geopolitical competition has been increasing, and this competition has become largely technology-based (OECD 2023). In an innovation system that is highly globally intertwined, this raises a complex dilemma for governments (see Table 1). On the one hand, maximally integrating into these systems enhances innovation and therefore competitiveness and the ability to address societal challenges such as climate change, but it increases risks of weaponized interdependence when becoming too dependent on adversarial states. On the other hand, closing off and securitizing innovation grants more autonomy, but risks running behind in international technology-based competition when not being able to reap the benefits of open knowledge flows, interactions, and learning about the most advanced technologies (Tan et al. 2025; Edler et al. 2023; Lee et al. 2024).
This question touches directly on the academic fields of International Relations (IR) and studies. It is therefore increasingly being studied by related academic communities in Europe, such as the Eu-SPRI forum (innovation policy) and EISA-PEC (IR). As a PhD Candidate in innovation policy with a background in IR, I visited both their conferences this summer to see how the two communities approach this question and, more importantly, what they can learn from each other.
The European Forum for Studies of Policies for Research and Innovation (Eu-SPRI Forum) represents a research field evolving since the 1960s at the encounter of economics, political science, sociology, Science and Technology Studies (STS), business administration, geography, and history. Historically, the field has focused on two rationales or ‘frames’ for engaging in innovation policy, the first being addressing market failures. Examples are uncertainty about outcomes and short investment horizons, which lead to a chronic undersupply of private R&D funding, with companies tending to favor easily applicable, incremental innovation over fundamental research with greater potential for radical breakthroughs. After the Second World War, during the early Cold War, Western governments started institutionalizing supply-side innovation policies to fix such market failures. Popular instruments are R&D subsidies or tax credits for knowledge-intensive companies, which remain the cornerstone of many present innovation policies, also, for example, in the Draghi report on the European Union’s (EU) competitiveness. Towards the end of the Cold War, the focus expanded to a second frame: creating competitive national innovation systems in a globalizing world by addressing system failures, such as weak university-industry links, which impede the commercialization of research. Various models emerged to assess how interactions between different actors shape innovation and to identify gaps governments can address, including the university-industry-government ‘Triple Helix’ model (Etzkowitz and Leydesdorff 2000), (technological) innovation systems (TIS) (Hekkert et al. 2007), and entrepreneurial ecosystems (Stam 2015). Staying in the Netherlands, an example can be found in Brainport Eindhoven, grouping Eindhoven University of Technology with high-tech companies like ASML, currently at the heart of global technology-based competition.
Since the mid-2010s, the field has expanded its focus to a third frame, not only studying how to facilitate R&D investments and innovation systems, but also how to actively create and support markets for promising innovations, steering demand towards addressing societal challenges such as climate change and healthcare in times of an aging population (Schot and Steinmueller 2018; Weber and Rohracher 2012; Mazzucato 2016). For instance, governments can act as lead customers for green innovations by incorporating such innovations in their public procurements or using regulations and standards to raise the bar and direct innovations towards specific policy goals (Edler and Georghiou 2007). These three frames for innovation policy, until recently, all focused on a situation displayed by the upper left quadrant of Table 1, i.e., reaping the benefits of global knowledge exchange and learning. Recent geopolitical developments, such as a more assertive China on the global stage and increasing US isolationism, led to increased attention in the EU for the role innovation policy can play to stay ahead in such competition, as well as the risks of global technology-based competition, as displayed in the other quadrants in Table 1. Consequently, Edler et al. (2023) suggested a fourth innovation policy frame in the shape of technology sovereignty, i.e., the capacity of a state to develop or source critical technologies for welfare, competitiveness, and autonomy, without one-sided dependencies.
At Eu-SPRI 2025, three of the thirty parallel sections explicitly focused on security-related issues. One section focused primarily on a conceptual level on how calls for more autonomy affect the capacity of governments to enhance innovation and address other societal challenges. One presentation outlined, for example, how European countries’ pledge to increase their defense budgets to 5% of GDP can be framed as a traditional supply-side ‘technology push’ policy based on R&D subsidies (frame 1). Without using parts of this budget to actively create markets for European innovations (frames 3 and 4), for example, by using (pre-commercial) public procurement as a tool to stimulate defense innovation, it merely deepens dependencies on the US military industry. It also decreases budgets for other innovation policy goals, such as sustainability transitions. A version of the presentation can be found on the LSE European Politics and Policy blog (Frenken 2025). Sections on specific research and innovation topics exhibited more in-depth, empirical work. For example, a section on research security (frame 2) and dual-use innovation examined how institutions and governments navigate the tension between scientific openness and collaboration on the one hand, and security risks and uneven responses between and within research systems on the other. A synthesis of this section’s conclusions can be found on this blog of the University of Manchester (James and Flanagan 2025).
Looking back at Eu-SPRI and relating it to the dilemma presented in Table 1, I figured that the current innovation policy literature mainly focuses on the balance between the upper left and the bottom right quadrant. More specifically, on the question of how to make interactions safer, and the consequences of decreased interactions on the capacity to innovate. An example is the growing attention on how to safeguard critical technologies (top right quadrant), grouped around the concept of technological sovereignty. Overall, present studies are mainly concerned with how geopolitics affect current innovation practices and goals, and less with offensive practices of weaponized interdependencies (bottom left quadrant), or the role of innovation in creating competitive advantages in geopolitical competition. For these topics, one has to turn to IR.
The Pan-European Conference on International Relations (PEC) is the main annual event of the European International Studies Association (EISA). Work presented at EISA-PEC tends to focus on conceptual rather than methodological strength due to the events-driven nature of the discipline. A keynote panelist described that, in times of relative peace and multilateral cooperation, the discipline turns liberal and pro-interdependencies, while in times of increased global competition and tension, IR scholars quickly leave their former love for liberal theories, and realists advocating for economic autonomy prevail. Resonating with standard work on scientific revolutions (Kuhn 2012), as conceptual agreement is lacking, there is limited room for empirical and methodological depth.
At EISA-PEC, five out of 34 special parallel sections were related to technology and innovation, next to 23 standing sections on more classical IR topics (e.g., “Realist thought, theory, and analysis in IR”). Due to strong links with the constructivist and qualitative research-oriented field of STS, several sections showed how technology as a social-political construct shapes power and security in international relations, mainly at the individual technology level. For example, a section with researchers from the Intimacies of Remote Warfare project brought together critical perspectives on the concept of “responsibility” in the context of algorithmic and remote warfare. Overall, however, less attention was dedicated to the question of where technology actually comes from and how governments can support promising innovations. Where this was done, innovation was presented as a rather linear process, without much attention to the systemic nature of the innovation process (frame 2), or the delicate political process of mobilizing and steering demand (frame 3), extensively studied in the innovation policy literature.
One notable exception to this claim was an International Political Economy section on geopolitics and economic statecraft, organized by the Multi-layered governance in EUrope and beyond research group at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. The section entailed high-quality qualitative and quantitative empirical work on economic statecraft and geoeconomics, i.e., how states deploy economic instruments and leverage interdependencies to pursue foreign policy goals, shape power relations, and manage international competition (Babić et al. 2024). In this community, instruments are reframed as “market-creating”, “market-correcting”, “market-intervening”, and “market-directing” (Van Apeldoorn and De Graaff 2022) instead of instruments categorized by market, system, and demand-steering failures (Schot and Steinmueller 2018; Weber and Rohracher 2012). Unlike the innovation policy literature, this community clearly distinguishes between such policies’ national and international/geopolitical dimensions. For example, Van Apeldoorn and De Graaff (2022) argue that through (partially) state-owned enterprises, Sovereign Wealth Funds, or international investment by the government or supported domestic firms, states can direct or control markets beyond their own borders to pursue their own foreign policy goals. However, the policy fields discussed at EISA-PEC were much broader than at Eu-SPRI, primarily focusing on industrial policy, trade, finance, and supply chains, with limited attention to innovation policy. This leaves the question of where innovation comes from and how geopolitics might enhance or impede its emergence largely unresolved, which is problematic considering the observation that competition is fiercest in the technology domain (OECD 2023).
Relating my insights from EISA-PEC to the dilemma in Table 1, I would argue that this European IR community is mostly preoccupied with how to move away from the bottom left quadrant (risky dependencies in a highly intertwined global economy), towards the upper right quadrant (maintaining autonomy and power in such an economy). Studies also focus on moving to the upper left quadrant, but only consider attention as a means to stay ahead in geopolitical competition rather than using it to address other societal challenges. Consequently, less effort is devoted to the costs of reduced knowledge flows and cross-border learning (bottom right quadrant), especially in light of other policy goals that might receive less attention and budgets due to increased geopolitical tensions, such as sustainability transitions.
Both fields focus on different parts of the technology-based international competition dilemma as presented in Table 1. Innovation studies are mainly concerned with how geopolitics and international security affect current practices and goals, and less with how innovation policy also shapes geopolitics. Conversely, IR is very well aware of innovation and technology’s role in international competition, but only to a limited extent scrutinizes where these capabilities come from and how geopolitical choices might affect innovation policy.
Combining insights from both fields could offer a more holistic view of the dilemma presented in the intro. For example, it would be interesting to look at how the technology-based international competition dilemma affects the emergence of innovation within complex systems, i.e., resulting in an IPE perspective on the Triple Helix, entrepreneurial ecosystems, or TIS literature. Next to studying the benefits of open knowledge flows and risks of closing off, it would also be interesting to think more about the geoeconomics and economic statecraft aspect of innovation policies. Following Van Apeldoorn and De Graaff (2022) in the IPE field, this could include studies on, for example, the intended or unintended foreign effects of domestic innovation policies.
Table 1. Overview of integration vs. closing-off dilemma for governments in times of global technology-based competition (based on Tan et al. 2025)
References
Babić, Milan, Nana de Graaff, Lukas Linsi, and Clara Weinhardt. 2024. “The Geoeconomic Turn in International Trade, Investment, and Technology.” Politics and Governance 12 (0). https://www.cogitatiopress.com/politicsandgovernance/article/view/9031.
Edler, Jakob, Knut Blind, Henning Kroll, and Torben Schubert. 2023. “Technology Sovereignty as an Emerging Frame for Innovation Policy. Defining Rationales, Ends and Means.” Research Policy 52 (6): 104765. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2023.104765.
Edler, Jakob, and Luke Georghiou. 2007. “Public Procurement and Innovation—Resurrecting the Demand Side.” Research Policy 36 (7): 949–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2007.03.003.
Etzkowitz, Henry, and Loet Leydesdorff. 2000. “The Dynamics of Innovation: From National Systems and ‘Mode 2’ to a Triple Helix of University–Industry–Government Relations.” Research Policy 29 (2): 109–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0048-7333(99)00055-4.
Frenken, Koen. 2025. “The New NATO Spending Target Will Hamper Europe’s Innovation Policy.” LSE EUROPP – European Politics and Policy. https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/europpblog/2025/06/30/the-new-nato-defence-spending-target-will-hamper-europes-innovation-policy/.
Hekkert, M. P., R. A. A. Suurs, S. O. Negro, S. Kuhlmann, and R. E. H. M. Smits. 2007. “Functions of Innovation Systems: A New Approach for Analysing Technological Change.” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 74 (4): 413–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2006.03.002.
James, Andrew, and Kieron Flanagan. 2025. “The Geopolitics of International Research Collaboration and the Impact of Research Security Concerns.” Research and Higher Education. Manchester Institute of Innovation Research Blog, January 6. https://blogs.manchester.ac.uk/mioir/2025/01/06/the-geopolitics-of-international-research-collaboration-and-the-impact-of-research-security-concerns/.
Kuhn, Thomas S. 2012. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions: 50th Anniversary Edition. Edited by Ian Hacking. University of Chicago Press. https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo13179781.html.
Lee, Jeong-Dong, Hanbin Kim, Saerom Si, and Saangkeub Lee. 2024. “Techno-Nationalism to Collaborative Technology Sovereignty.” Science and Public Policy, August 23, scae046. https://doi.org/10.1093/scipol/scae046.
Mazzucato, Mariana. 2016. “From Market Fixing to Market-Creating: A New Framework for Innovation Policy.” Industry and Innovation 23 (2): 140–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/13662716.2016.1146124.
OECD. 2023. OECD Science, Technology and Innovation Outlook 2023: Enabling Transitions in Times of Disruption. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/science-and-technology/oecd-science-technology-and-innovation-outlook-2023_0b55736e-en.
Schot, Johan, and W. Edward Steinmueller. 2018. “Three Frames for Innovation Policy: R&D, Systems of Innovation and Transformative Change.” Research Policy 47 (9): 1554–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2018.08.011.
Stam, Erik. 2015. “Entrepreneurial Ecosystems and Regional Policy: A Sympathetic Critique.” European Planning Studies 23 (9): 1759–69. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2015.1061484.
Tan, Yeling, Mark Dallas, Henry Farrell, and Abraham Newman. 2025. “Driven to Self-Reliance: Technological Interdependence and the Chinese Innovation Ecosystem.” International Studies Quarterly 69 (2): sqaf017. https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaf017.
Van Apeldoorn, Bastiaan, and Naná De Graaff. 2022. “The State in Global Capitalism before and after the Covid-19 Crisis.” Contemporary Politics 28 (3): 306–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2021.2022337.
Weber, K.M., and H. Rohracher. 2012. “Legitimizing Research, Technology and Innovation Policies for Transformative Change: Combining Insights from Innovation Systems and Multi-Level Perspective in a Comprehensive ‘failures’ Framework.” Research Policy 41 (6): 1037–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.respol.2011.10.015.
Further Reading on E-International Relations
Source link
#Bridging #International #Relations #Innovation #Studies #Lessons #Communities
![Iran war: Tehran vows response to US seizure of cargo shipSkip next section Oil prices up, stocks down amid Strait of Hormuz standoff04/20/2026April 20, 2026Oil prices up, stocks down amid Strait of Hormuz standoffCrude prices jumped and the US dollar rose but equity futures fell in early Asian trading on Monday.
The price of Brent crude, the international benchmark, soared as much as 7% to .85 a barrel.
The S&P 500 futures, meanwhile, fell about 0.9%, while the US dollar appreciated against several other currencies, including the euro and the Japanese yen.
The market movements signal investor concern over the Middle East situation, with Iran shutting the Strait of Hormuz once again amid the continuing US blockade of Iranian ports and ships.
Will the Iran war cause a global recession?To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSfxSkip next section Iran ‘will soon respond’ to US seizure of Iranian-flagged ship, military says04/20/2026April 20, 2026Iran ‘will soon respond’ to US seizure of Iranian-flagged ship, military saysIranian authorities have accused the US of violating the ceasefire agreement between the two sides by firing at one of Iran’s commercial ships in the Gulf of Oman.
Iran’s top joint military command, the Hazrat Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, vowed to respond swiftly to the US actions.
“We warn that the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will soon respond and retaliate against this armed piracy by the US military,” the spokesperson said.
Earlier, US naval forces stationed in the region intercepted and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo vessel, which they said had tried to sail through the waters of the Gulf of Oman, in violation of the US blockade of Iranian ports and shipping.
Iranian state media quoted a military spokesperson as saying that the vessel was en route from China to Iran.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSfnSkip next section Why is Iran not planning to join new round of talks with US?04/19/2026April 19, 2026Why is Iran not planning to join new round of talks with US?Pakistan said it was ready to host a new round of talks, but Iran appears unwilling to attendImage: Qamar Zaman/dpa/picture allianceHours after Donald Trump announced he was dispatching US negotiators for a fresh round of talks in Islamabad, Iran said it has no intention of joining.
So far, engagement between Washington and Tehran has been limited to a single 21-hour negotiating session in Islamabad on April 11 that ended without any breakthrough.
Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said afterwards that the US side “ultimately failed to gain the trust of the Iranian delegation in this round of negotiation.”
Washington’s hardline stance further complicates matters
A major sticking point is the US blockade of Iranian ports, which continues to overshadow diplomacy just days before the two-week ceasefire is due to expire.
Trump’s announcement that US Marines had seized an Iranian ship attempting to evade the blockade is likely to fuel tensions further.
Although Iran briefly reopened the Strait of Hormuz following a ceasefire in Lebanon, it quickly reversed course in response to the ongoing US blockade.
Earlier, the Fars and Tasnim news agencies, citing anonymous sources, reported that lifting the US blockade was a precondition for any renewed talks.
Another point of contention: Iran’s enrichment program
Trump said on Friday that Iran had agreed to give up its stock of around 440 kilograms of enriched uranium.
However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry later said the stockpile was “not going to be transferred anywhere.”
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei told state TV that the “transfer of Iran’s enriched uranium to the US has never been raised in negotiations.”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSf6Skip next section Iran has ‘no plans’ to join talks in Islamabad: state media04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran has ‘no plans’ to join talks in Islamabad: state mediaTehran was not planning to take part in a new round of negotiations with the United States in Islamabad, Iranian state media reported on Sunday
“There are currently no plans to participate in the next round of Iran-US talks,” state broadcaster IRIB reported, in English, on X.
It was not immediately clear who was behind the announcement.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSWZSkip next section Trump: US Marines seized Iranian-flagged cargo ship04/19/2026April 19, 2026Trump: US Marines seized Iranian-flagged cargo shipPresident Donald Trump said US forces seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship on Sunday. The vessel was trying to evade a US naval blockade near the Strait of Hormuz, he wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.
“Our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engineroom,” Trump wrote.
He added that US Marines had taken custody of the ship, named Touska, and were “seeing what’s on board!”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSMsSkip next section Pakistani PM assures Iranian president of committment as mediator of peace04/19/2026April 19, 2026Pakistani PM assures Iranian president of committment as mediator of peacePakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said he discussed the conflict in the Gulf with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Sunday.
Sharif wrote in a post on X that he “shared insights from my recent engagements with leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Türkiye.”
“I appreciated Iran’s engagement, including its high-level delegation to Islamabad for the historic talks, and recent discussions with Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir,” Sharif said.
Sharif told Pezeshkian that Pakistan remains committed to its role as a facilitator of peace and regional stability.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSBlSkip next section Unclear if Iran will join second round of Islamabad talks04/19/2026April 19, 2026Unclear if Iran will join second round of Islamabad talksIt is still unclear whether Iran will ultimately join the second round of talks in Islamabad with the United States.
State-run Iranian news agency Irna reported Sunday that “there is no clear prospect of fruitful negotiations.”
Irna also pointed to Washington’s “maximalism and unreasonable and unrealistic demands, frequent changes of positions, constant contradictions and the continuation of the so-called naval blockade.”
Meanwhile, the Fars and Tasnim news agencies, quoting anonymous sources, said, “The overall atmosphere cannot be assessed as very positive.”
Fars cited one source as saying that the lifting of a US blockade on Iranian ports was a precondition for continued talks.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CS5vSkip next section IN DEPTH: Mines in the Strait of Hormuz: How dangerous are they?04/19/2026April 19, 2026IN DEPTH: Mines in the Strait of Hormuz: How dangerous are they?Underwater mines can pose a threat in infested areas for decades to come [FILE: Black Sea, Bulgaria on July 1, 2022]Image: BULGARIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE Via REUTERSOn Friday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said his country was prepared to supply mine clearance and maritime reconnaissance to help secure the Strait of Hormuz.
The same day, Iran’s top diplomat Abbas Araghchi declared the critical waterway “completely open” for the duration of the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire, and US President Donald Trump likewise said it was “ready for full passage.”
The following day, Iran reversed its decision, shutting the strait again.
Either way, maritime traffic might still be at risk, given that Iranian authorities had previously indicated there may be underwater mines in the strait.
How dangerous are naval mines, and what can be done to clear them? Find out here.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CS5KSkip next section Vance to return to Islamabad for new round of talks04/19/2026April 19, 2026Vance to return to Islamabad for new round of talksThe trio — JD Vance (right), Jared Kushner (left) and Steve Witkoff (middle) — were in Islambad during the first round of talks [FILE: April 12, 2026]Image: Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo/picture allianceUS Vice President JD Vance, who led the first round of talks between the US and Iran last weekend, will return to Islamabad for the negotiations, according to a White House official.
Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner will also be part of the delegation.
Earlier, Trump had said Vance would not go to the Pakistani capital. “It’s only because of security,” Trump told ABC News. “JD’s great.”
Last Sunday, Vance left Islamabad after 21 hours of talks with Iranian officials ended without a breakthrough. Iran war: What’s next after Islamabad talks fail?To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRyrSkip next section Two cruise ships pass through Hormuz04/19/2026April 19, 2026Two cruise ships pass through HormuzThe Mein Schiff 4, seen here on the right in 2020, passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday (File photo: July 2020)Image: Petra Nowack/penofoto/imago imagesGermany-based TUI Cruises said that its Mein Schiff 4 and Mein Schiff 5 ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday.
According to the maritime data service MarineTraffic, only one other cruise ship, the Celestial Discovery, formerly known as the Aida aura, had been able to pass the strait since the start of the Iran war on February 28, when the US and Israel attacked Iran.
Tui said that all passengers had previously been brought home and both ships were operating with reduced crews, adding that it had obtained approvals from relevant authorities to cross the strait, under careful consideration of the security situation.
It said the ships would now continue on to the Mediterranean Sea.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvSSkip next section Macron to meet with Lebanese PM04/19/2026April 19, 2026Macron to meet with Lebanese PMMacron has demanded that the Lebanese government arrest those responsible for the attack [FILE: April 8, 2026]Image: Tom Nicholson/REUTERSFrench President Emmanuel Macron is expected to meet with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in Paris this week, his office announced.
The meeting comes amid a fragile 10-day ceasefire between Israel and the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.
The visit was announced a day after France blamed Hezbollah for an ambush on UN peacekeepers that left one French soldier dead and three others wounded.
Macron is expected to urge Lebanese authorities to “shed full light on the incident” and “identify and prosecute those responsible without delay,” his office added.
With the move, the French government will highlight Macron’s commitment to seeing “full and complete respect for the ceasefire in Lebanon” as well as France’s support for Lebanon’s “territorial integrity,” the president’s office said on Sunday.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvRSkip next section Iran not sending negotiating delegation to Pakistan, Tasnim reports04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran not sending negotiating delegation to Pakistan, Tasnim reportsIran is not sending a negotiating delegation to Pakistan “as long as there is a naval blockade,” Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported on Sunday.
The development came after Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who spoke by phone with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi on Sunday, had said his country was working to “bridge” differences between Washington and Tehran.
Earlier, US President Donald Trump had announced that US negotiators were due in Islamabad on Monday evening.
Late Saturday, Parliament Speaker Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, who has emerged as Iran’s main negotiator, said in an interview on state television that “there will be no retreat in the field of diplomacy.” [embed]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TDeUMPkqbE[/embed]
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvESkip next section Trump accuses Iran of ceasefire violations04/19/2026April 19, 2026Trump accuses Iran of ceasefire violationsTrump has said he won’t let Tehran ‘blackmail us’ over the Strait of Hormuz [April 16, 2026]Image: Mehmet Eser/SOPA Images/ZUMA/picture allianceUS President Donald Trump accused the Iranian regime of violating the current ceasefire agreement and threatened to “to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge,” if Iran does not make a deal with the US.
Tehran said on Saturday it would keep the Strait of Hormuz closed. At least two ships reported they had been fired upon while approaching the strait on Saturday.
“Iran decided to fire bullets yesterday in the Strait of Hormuz — A Total Violation of our Ceasefire Agreement!” Trump wrote in a post Sunday on his Truth Social platform. “That wasn’t nice, was it?”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRlKSkip next section Iran accuses US of violating ceasefire via blockade04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran accuses US of violating ceasefire via blockadeIran has called the US blockade on its ports a “violation” of the ceasefire agreement mediated by Pakistan some 10-days ago, which paused over six weeks of fighting.
“The United States’ so-called ‘blockade’ of Iran’s ports or coastline is not only a violation of Pakistani-mediated ceasefire but also both unlawful and criminal,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismaeil Baqaei said Sunday on X.
He cited a United Nations General Assembly resolution to argue that the blockade was an “act of aggression” against Iran.
“Moreover, by deliberately inflicting collective punishment on the Iranian population, it amounts to war crime and crime against humanity,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman went on to say.
Iran has reverted to shuttering the critical Strait of Hormuz after Trump refused to lift the blockade.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRlfSkip next section US negotiators due in Pakistan early next week, Trump says04/19/2026April 19, 2026US negotiators due in Pakistan early next week, Trump saysUS negotiators are due in the Pakistani capital on Monday evening, US President Donald Trump announced on Sunday, as Islamabad mediates efforts aimed at ending the US-Israeli war on Iran.
“My Representatives are going to Islamabad, Pakistan — They will be there tomorrow evening, for Negotiations,” Trump said in a lengthy post on his Truth Social platform.
He then strayed into criticism and threats against Iran, which he accused of violating the ceasefire agreement by attacking ships attempting to pass through the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Saturday.
Iran had briefly reopened the critical waterway on Friday, only to announce closing it again less than 24 hours later after Trump refused to lift a blockade on its ports.
Questioning Iran’s closure of the strait, Trump called it “strange” because “our BLOCKADE has already closed it.”
Without mentioning any of the terms, he also said the US proposed a peace agreement.
“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!” Trump went on to say.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRiQ#Iran #war #Tehran #vows #response #seizure #cargo #ship](https://i0.wp.com/static.dw.com/image/76386594_6.jpg?ssl=1 "Iran war: Tehran vows response to US seizure of cargo shipSkip next section Oil prices up, stocks down amid Strait of Hormuz standoff04/20/2026April 20, 2026Oil prices up, stocks down amid Strait of Hormuz standoffCrude prices jumped and the US dollar rose but equity futures fell in early Asian trading on Monday.
The price of Brent crude, the international benchmark, soared as much as 7% to .85 a barrel.
The S&P 500 futures, meanwhile, fell about 0.9%, while the US dollar appreciated against several other currencies, including the euro and the Japanese yen.
The market movements signal investor concern over the Middle East situation, with Iran shutting the Strait of Hormuz once again amid the continuing US blockade of Iranian ports and ships.
Will the Iran war cause a global recession?To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSfxSkip next section Iran ‘will soon respond’ to US seizure of Iranian-flagged ship, military says04/20/2026April 20, 2026Iran ‘will soon respond’ to US seizure of Iranian-flagged ship, military saysIranian authorities have accused the US of violating the ceasefire agreement between the two sides by firing at one of Iran’s commercial ships in the Gulf of Oman.
Iran’s top joint military command, the Hazrat Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters, vowed to respond swiftly to the US actions.
“We warn that the armed forces of the Islamic Republic of Iran will soon respond and retaliate against this armed piracy by the US military,” the spokesperson said.
Earlier, US naval forces stationed in the region intercepted and seized an Iranian-flagged cargo vessel, which they said had tried to sail through the waters of the Gulf of Oman, in violation of the US blockade of Iranian ports and shipping.
Iranian state media quoted a military spokesperson as saying that the vessel was en route from China to Iran.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSfnSkip next section Why is Iran not planning to join new round of talks with US?04/19/2026April 19, 2026Why is Iran not planning to join new round of talks with US?Pakistan said it was ready to host a new round of talks, but Iran appears unwilling to attendImage: Qamar Zaman/dpa/picture allianceHours after Donald Trump announced he was dispatching US negotiators for a fresh round of talks in Islamabad, Iran said it has no intention of joining.
So far, engagement between Washington and Tehran has been limited to a single 21-hour negotiating session in Islamabad on April 11 that ended without any breakthrough.
Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf said afterwards that the US side “ultimately failed to gain the trust of the Iranian delegation in this round of negotiation.”
Washington’s hardline stance further complicates matters
A major sticking point is the US blockade of Iranian ports, which continues to overshadow diplomacy just days before the two-week ceasefire is due to expire.
Trump’s announcement that US Marines had seized an Iranian ship attempting to evade the blockade is likely to fuel tensions further.
Although Iran briefly reopened the Strait of Hormuz following a ceasefire in Lebanon, it quickly reversed course in response to the ongoing US blockade.
Earlier, the Fars and Tasnim news agencies, citing anonymous sources, reported that lifting the US blockade was a precondition for any renewed talks.
Another point of contention: Iran’s enrichment program
Trump said on Friday that Iran had agreed to give up its stock of around 440 kilograms of enriched uranium.
However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry later said the stockpile was “not going to be transferred anywhere.”
Foreign Ministry Spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei told state TV that the “transfer of Iran’s enriched uranium to the US has never been raised in negotiations.”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSf6Skip next section Iran has ‘no plans’ to join talks in Islamabad: state media04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran has ‘no plans’ to join talks in Islamabad: state mediaTehran was not planning to take part in a new round of negotiations with the United States in Islamabad, Iranian state media reported on Sunday
“There are currently no plans to participate in the next round of Iran-US talks,” state broadcaster IRIB reported, in English, on X.
It was not immediately clear who was behind the announcement.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSWZSkip next section Trump: US Marines seized Iranian-flagged cargo ship04/19/2026April 19, 2026Trump: US Marines seized Iranian-flagged cargo shipPresident Donald Trump said US forces seized an Iranian-flagged cargo ship on Sunday. The vessel was trying to evade a US naval blockade near the Strait of Hormuz, he wrote in a post on his Truth Social platform.
“Our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engineroom,” Trump wrote.
He added that US Marines had taken custody of the ship, named Touska, and were “seeing what’s on board!”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSMsSkip next section Pakistani PM assures Iranian president of committment as mediator of peace04/19/2026April 19, 2026Pakistani PM assures Iranian president of committment as mediator of peacePakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said he discussed the conflict in the Gulf with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian on Sunday.
Sharif wrote in a post on X that he “shared insights from my recent engagements with leaders of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Türkiye.”
“I appreciated Iran’s engagement, including its high-level delegation to Islamabad for the historic talks, and recent discussions with Field Marshal Syed Asim Munir,” Sharif said.
Sharif told Pezeshkian that Pakistan remains committed to its role as a facilitator of peace and regional stability.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CSBlSkip next section Unclear if Iran will join second round of Islamabad talks04/19/2026April 19, 2026Unclear if Iran will join second round of Islamabad talksIt is still unclear whether Iran will ultimately join the second round of talks in Islamabad with the United States.
State-run Iranian news agency Irna reported Sunday that “there is no clear prospect of fruitful negotiations.”
Irna also pointed to Washington’s “maximalism and unreasonable and unrealistic demands, frequent changes of positions, constant contradictions and the continuation of the so-called naval blockade.”
Meanwhile, the Fars and Tasnim news agencies, quoting anonymous sources, said, “The overall atmosphere cannot be assessed as very positive.”
Fars cited one source as saying that the lifting of a US blockade on Iranian ports was a precondition for continued talks.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CS5vSkip next section IN DEPTH: Mines in the Strait of Hormuz: How dangerous are they?04/19/2026April 19, 2026IN DEPTH: Mines in the Strait of Hormuz: How dangerous are they?Underwater mines can pose a threat in infested areas for decades to come [FILE: Black Sea, Bulgaria on July 1, 2022]Image: BULGARIAN MINISTRY OF DEFENCE Via REUTERSOn Friday, German Chancellor Friedrich Merz said his country was prepared to supply mine clearance and maritime reconnaissance to help secure the Strait of Hormuz.
The same day, Iran’s top diplomat Abbas Araghchi declared the critical waterway “completely open” for the duration of the Israel-Lebanon ceasefire, and US President Donald Trump likewise said it was “ready for full passage.”
The following day, Iran reversed its decision, shutting the strait again.
Either way, maritime traffic might still be at risk, given that Iranian authorities had previously indicated there may be underwater mines in the strait.
How dangerous are naval mines, and what can be done to clear them? Find out here.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CS5KSkip next section Vance to return to Islamabad for new round of talks04/19/2026April 19, 2026Vance to return to Islamabad for new round of talksThe trio — JD Vance (right), Jared Kushner (left) and Steve Witkoff (middle) — were in Islambad during the first round of talks [FILE: April 12, 2026]Image: Jacquelyn Martin/AP Photo/picture allianceUS Vice President JD Vance, who led the first round of talks between the US and Iran last weekend, will return to Islamabad for the negotiations, according to a White House official.
Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff and son-in-law Jared Kushner will also be part of the delegation.
Earlier, Trump had said Vance would not go to the Pakistani capital. “It’s only because of security,” Trump told ABC News. “JD’s great.”
Last Sunday, Vance left Islamabad after 21 hours of talks with Iranian officials ended without a breakthrough. Iran war: What’s next after Islamabad talks fail?To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRyrSkip next section Two cruise ships pass through Hormuz04/19/2026April 19, 2026Two cruise ships pass through HormuzThe Mein Schiff 4, seen here on the right in 2020, passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday (File photo: July 2020)Image: Petra Nowack/penofoto/imago imagesGermany-based TUI Cruises said that its Mein Schiff 4 and Mein Schiff 5 ships passed through the Strait of Hormuz on Sunday.
According to the maritime data service MarineTraffic, only one other cruise ship, the Celestial Discovery, formerly known as the Aida aura, had been able to pass the strait since the start of the Iran war on February 28, when the US and Israel attacked Iran.
Tui said that all passengers had previously been brought home and both ships were operating with reduced crews, adding that it had obtained approvals from relevant authorities to cross the strait, under careful consideration of the security situation.
It said the ships would now continue on to the Mediterranean Sea.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvSSkip next section Macron to meet with Lebanese PM04/19/2026April 19, 2026Macron to meet with Lebanese PMMacron has demanded that the Lebanese government arrest those responsible for the attack [FILE: April 8, 2026]Image: Tom Nicholson/REUTERSFrench President Emmanuel Macron is expected to meet with Lebanese Prime Minister Nawaf Salam in Paris this week, his office announced.
The meeting comes amid a fragile 10-day ceasefire between Israel and the Iran-backed militant group Hezbollah.
The visit was announced a day after France blamed Hezbollah for an ambush on UN peacekeepers that left one French soldier dead and three others wounded.
Macron is expected to urge Lebanese authorities to “shed full light on the incident” and “identify and prosecute those responsible without delay,” his office added.
With the move, the French government will highlight Macron’s commitment to seeing “full and complete respect for the ceasefire in Lebanon” as well as France’s support for Lebanon’s “territorial integrity,” the president’s office said on Sunday.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvRSkip next section Iran not sending negotiating delegation to Pakistan, Tasnim reports04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran not sending negotiating delegation to Pakistan, Tasnim reportsIran is not sending a negotiating delegation to Pakistan “as long as there is a naval blockade,” Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported on Sunday.
The development came after Pakistani Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar, who spoke by phone with his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi on Sunday, had said his country was working to “bridge” differences between Washington and Tehran.
Earlier, US President Donald Trump had announced that US negotiators were due in Islamabad on Monday evening.
Late Saturday, Parliament Speaker Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf, who has emerged as Iran’s main negotiator, said in an interview on state television that “there will be no retreat in the field of diplomacy.” [embed]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0TDeUMPkqbE[/embed]
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRvESkip next section Trump accuses Iran of ceasefire violations04/19/2026April 19, 2026Trump accuses Iran of ceasefire violationsTrump has said he won’t let Tehran ‘blackmail us’ over the Strait of Hormuz [April 16, 2026]Image: Mehmet Eser/SOPA Images/ZUMA/picture allianceUS President Donald Trump accused the Iranian regime of violating the current ceasefire agreement and threatened to “to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge,” if Iran does not make a deal with the US.
Tehran said on Saturday it would keep the Strait of Hormuz closed. At least two ships reported they had been fired upon while approaching the strait on Saturday.
“Iran decided to fire bullets yesterday in the Strait of Hormuz — A Total Violation of our Ceasefire Agreement!” Trump wrote in a post Sunday on his Truth Social platform. “That wasn’t nice, was it?”
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRlKSkip next section Iran accuses US of violating ceasefire via blockade04/19/2026April 19, 2026Iran accuses US of violating ceasefire via blockadeIran has called the US blockade on its ports a “violation” of the ceasefire agreement mediated by Pakistan some 10-days ago, which paused over six weeks of fighting.
“The United States’ so-called ‘blockade’ of Iran’s ports or coastline is not only a violation of Pakistani-mediated ceasefire but also both unlawful and criminal,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismaeil Baqaei said Sunday on X.
He cited a United Nations General Assembly resolution to argue that the blockade was an “act of aggression” against Iran.
“Moreover, by deliberately inflicting collective punishment on the Iranian population, it amounts to war crime and crime against humanity,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman went on to say.
Iran has reverted to shuttering the critical Strait of Hormuz after Trump refused to lift the blockade.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRlfSkip next section US negotiators due in Pakistan early next week, Trump says04/19/2026April 19, 2026US negotiators due in Pakistan early next week, Trump saysUS negotiators are due in the Pakistani capital on Monday evening, US President Donald Trump announced on Sunday, as Islamabad mediates efforts aimed at ending the US-Israeli war on Iran.
“My Representatives are going to Islamabad, Pakistan — They will be there tomorrow evening, for Negotiations,” Trump said in a lengthy post on his Truth Social platform.
He then strayed into criticism and threats against Iran, which he accused of violating the ceasefire agreement by attacking ships attempting to pass through the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Saturday.
Iran had briefly reopened the critical waterway on Friday, only to announce closing it again less than 24 hours later after Trump refused to lift a blockade on its ports.
Questioning Iran’s closure of the strait, Trump called it “strange” because “our BLOCKADE has already closed it.”
Without mentioning any of the terms, he also said the US proposed a peace agreement.
“We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!” Trump went on to say.
https://p.dw.com/p/5CRiQ#Iran #war #Tehran #vows #response #seizure #cargo #ship")
Post Comment