Critical Feminist Justpeace: Grounding Theory in Grassroots Praxis
By Karie Cross Riddle
Oxford University Press, 2024
2025 marks the 25th anniversary of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, which launched the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) Agenda, a pioneering comprehensive gender perspective on international conflicts and a roadmap for countries in peacebuilding processes. In assessing the successes and failures of this agenda, “Critical Feminist Justpeace” by Karie Cross Riddle is a relevant contribution to the theoretical discussion of feminism in international relations and its explanatory capacity for global phenomena that face significant challenges in these uncertain times.
Riddle employs a critical feminist methodology to advance a normative theory of change, bearing the book’s name, which overturns the traditional ways peacebuilding is understood and materialized. The book adopts a top-down approach, beginning with international organizations and states, and then transitioning to local-level peacebuilding.
The normative aspect of Riddle’s proposal is based on the strand of feminism known as transnational feminism, which draws on contributions from development, decolonial, and postcolonial theories in the context of globalization and the erosion of national borders. It employs the lens of intersectionality to problematize social interactions in territorial spaces across borders, advocating for the establishment of global support networks that prioritize the Global South. Therefore, the author defines critical feminist justpeace based on its goals, which are to reduce structural power hierarchies and direct forms of violence that directly affect historically marginalized groups and promote equitable justice outcomes at the public and private levels.
The book’s thesis argues that while the WPS agenda has integrated and institutionalized women’s experiences and problems as agents in peace processes in the context of armed conflict, its implementation has been deficient. The author critiques the agenda for not fully addressing the substantive issues in remote territories, leading to ineffective peacebuilding. From this thesis emerges her effort to construct a grounded theory of ‘Critical Feminist Justpeace,’ identifying the central critical positions regarding the WPS agenda and peacebuilding processes in general. However, the work fails to illuminate how the author has constructed this theory in a clear and didactic manner while emphasizing its usefulness as an alternative path and a guide for thinking about the relationship between gender, armed conflict, and peace.
While acknowledging the value of research and the incorporation of feminism into an analysis of the implications of an armed conflict such as this one on the lives of women and girls, the emphasis on this case study does not allow for the reproduction of an analytical model with considerable degrees of generalization at the methodological and methodological levels, considering that the aim of any theory is universality. The book’s most significant contribution, which deepens our understanding of this issue by providing proper dimensions and categories, is a point that deserves our appreciation and respect, rather than a comprehensive theory, as it attempts to demonstrate.
The author uses a theoretical framework that captures and makes visible the contributions of multiple key feminist authors to critical theory, including Uma Narayan, Judith Butler, and J. Ann Tickner, as well as other scholars from developing countries who emphasize the need to internationalize and decolonize the discipline of international relations. This is one of the book’s highlights and main merits for future research and for students who wish to broaden their horizons beyond mainstream authors.
Historically, women have not been called upon to reinterpret international politics based on their valid experiences. They are often considered objects of research and victims of international problems, but not subjects or actors in their own right. Feminist approaches to international relations seek to make visible and incorporate into research agendas how the discipline has evolved from discourses that reinforce narrow and exclusionary notions regarding gender. This is especially important in discussions within the field of peace and security studies – which relates to UNSC resolution 1325 and the WPS agenda – where feminism has gained prominence, and its contributions are more widely used, compounded by the fact that specific issues central to the perspectives of the Global South are still absent or under-theorized in mainstream academic studies in the West, such as the relationship between the legacies of colonization, ethnic and religious conflicts, and institutional fragility, the effects of extractive practices by governments and multinational corporations on food insecurity and water access, and violence against indigenous women activists in Latin America.
The book’s central theme is the author’s experience conducting field research in Manipur and Assam, India, during her doctoral studies, which are case studies that highlight the difficulties in consolidating the logic of the Westphalian nation-state. This is one of the axes of feminist criticism in international relations theory, casting doubt on the concept of state formation, ideas of sovereignty, security, and development, and the need for an intersectional lens that sheds light on the connections that perpetuate armed conflicts and cycles of violence, which make it extremely difficult for peacebuilders to address the impacts of individual and collective trauma from protracted social dynamics that result in the continued violation of human rights.
Another of the book’s substantive contributions is the description of “women’s peacebuilding praxis,” as she shares her findings in Manipur. Socially constructed gender identities also determine power distributions, impacting women’s positions in both global and local politics, evident in the structural obstacles and hierarchies of gender, ethnicity/race, and class experienced by women peacebuilders not only in Manipur but around the world. This is reflected in the still low percentage of women negotiators in peace processes – 9.6% of negotiators by 2023, according to the UN –mostly relegated to participants and observers, as evidenced in chapters four and five.
The text details the entire process from methodological design to fieldwork practice, highlighting key elements such as research ethics, relationships with community interlocutors, the challenges of translation, and the difficulties faced by Riddle as a researcher during and after her stay in India. The narrative emphasizes the importance of self-care and support networks, humanizing the work of women researchers in complex environments.
A deep understanding of the research process is immensely beneficial for future studies involving fieldwork in conflict-affected communities in the Global South. The author attempts to establish a “critical feminist methodology as an example of reconstruction through praxis” (p. 183) in her concluding remarks. However, she leaves unaddressed one of the central conflicts between the rationalist and critical or reflectivist paradigms in International Relations (IR). This conflict arises from the criticism that rationalist approaches have towards critical paradigms for their lack of research programs supported by methods and techniques that ensure scientific validity. There is a call for these paradigms to move beyond mere criticism and to genuinely test the validity of their claims through some form of research process.
Conversely, critical theorists question the very foundations of how scientific knowledge is created, asserting that a formal disciplinary structure for studying international relations is unnecessary. From its inception, International Relations has lacked formal disciplinary elements, with a focus on deconstructing the dominant narratives surrounding international phenomena. Critical theory often emphasizes concerns for actors with limited power, while feminist studies contribute significantly by highlighting issues that have historically been overlooked, as well as by bringing more women into discussions. Although there is a strong emphasis on recognizing, making visible, and incorporating these marginalized voices—addressed through the “why”—there remains a lack of consensus and theoretical or methodological rigor in discussing the “how.”
Consequently, the book’s weakest section is its conclusions, which consist of general recommendations for courses of action that do not result in a clear roadmap for realistically combatting the five structures that cause and perpetuate the conflict in Manipur. These structures are also present in other armed conflicts in the Global South. A roadmap proposal may establish levels of intervention at the international, domestic, and local levels and outline their interrelationships.
The same criticism applies to the concept of the “Global South.” While it can serve as a functional, analytical category and a framework for contrast to the “North” or “Center,” it can also create analytical confusion. This terminology risks generating an illusion of a homogeneous “non-Western” world or “the South,” suggesting that these regions have similar interests. Such simplifications can obscure the epistemological tensions and the diverse realities of the actors involved, leading to criticisms related to “parochialism” in International Relations—referring to theories that only address a narrow reality.
Since the book focuses specifically on the case of Manipur, it highlights the complexity of applying the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda and theoretical concepts, such as Critical Feminist Justpeace, in other contexts, particularly where the specifics of conflict, gender-based violence, and peacebuilding efforts differ significantly.
Critical Feminist Justpeace aspires to be a conflict-transforming initiative based on “ethical reconstruction” (p. 186). In that case, it is not only necessary but also crucial to problematize further what this statement means, as well as the scope, depth, and limitations of ethics within the epistemological frameworks of the Western liberal order. This critical examination is not a passive exercise but an active engagement that demands our attention and involvement, not only in analytical terms but also in the political, socio-cultural, and economic impact on communities whose social fabric has been deeply damaged by long periods of conflict, since it could even generate the opposite effect on the risk groups it seeks to protect, considering this ethical reconstruction illegitimate and threatening to the survival of the parties in conflict.
Not only do women face unique challenges compared to men simply because they are women, but these specific challenges also require specific gender-sensitive responses. As the author emphasizes, feminist theories are distinguished by their ethical commitments to inclusion and self-reflection, as well as their attention to relationships and power in international relations.
This book presents an opportunity for further exploration of regions and case studies, such as: Are there different forms of feminist peace, or is there just one feminist peace? How can we enrich critical theory from the diverse feminisms to advance effective epistemic emancipation in international relations? Who defines national interests? If women were included in decision-making in the peacebuilding cycle, would the national interest be interpreted differently, and if so, how? , being an opportunity for other regions and case studies, such as in Latin America where, as in other developing regions, inequality, authoritarian legacy, armed violence, militarization, organized crime, and femicides urgently call on peacebuilders, civil society actors, and national and multilateral institutions to implement innovative and sustainable solutions over time, while for us academics, we move towards what the author refers to as, “critically reconstructing research norms for peace and conflict studies” (p. 195).
Further Reading on E-International Relations
Source link
#Review #Critical #Feminist #Justpeace
![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