The possibility of an imminent agreement to end the ongoing conflict between the United States and Iran remains slim, as both sides continue to exchange attacks and strong rhetoric. The U.S. recently announced it is entering a new phase of the conflict, which involves a broad economic blockade targeting Iran and countries that trade with it. This move aims to pressure Iran into negotiations and stop its attacks on shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial global oil transit route. Since the conflict began in February, the Strait has been effectively closed, disrupting global trade. A Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed in June, which was meant to lead to a permanent ceasefire and a deal within 60 days, has now expired. With the conflict entering its seventh month, experts have been asked how they believe it might unfold. U.S. officials hope that military and economic pressure will weaken Iran’s position in negotiations. Jason Campbell, a Senior Fellow at the Middle East Institute, explained that the White House is re-evaluating its political boundaries and has shifted from relying solely on military action to using both military and economic tools. While the administration appears content with maintaining the blockade and allowing occasional strikes against Iran’s ability to disrupt shipping, it hopes new sanctions will push Iran to negotiate from a weaker position. Although U.S. forces have allowed a limited flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz to avoid economic turmoil, this was not the original goal of the conflict. Campbell believes Iran is likely to demand significant concessions, which may be politically difficult for the Trump administration to accept. Dr. Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, an associate fellow at Chatham House, stated that recent strikes have not changed Iran’s strategic approach to the conflict. She noted that Iran is preparing for continued economic pressure and periodic attacks, and plans to respond in a measured way to avoid escalating the conflict further. While the economic squeeze could harm Iran’s already struggling economy, she does not believe it will change Iran’s stance on negotiations anytime soon. Iran, she said, is likely waiting for the U.S. to revisit the MoU or offer some concessions. Tehran is not eager to surrender to U.S. pressure but is looking for a way out that does not require compromising its core policies. Nicholas Hopton, a Distinguished Fellow at the Royal United Services Institute and former UK ambassador to Iran, said the recent increase in military activity is unlikely to lead to Iran’s surrender. He noted that economic pressure may not be effective, as many countries that trade with Iran, such as China and Russia, are unlikely to support U.S. sanctions. Iran, he added, retains the ability to disrupt the Strait of Hormuz, which is vital to the global economy. Hopton suggested that the U.S. already has an exit strategy in the form of the June MoU, which includes lifting all U.S. sanctions on Iran. This, he said, could weaken Iran’s powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) over time and lead to gradual political and social change in Iran. However, he warned that achieving this would require patience, which is in short supply, and that the current situation is likely to remain unstable and damaging for all parties involved.