The United States has declared it remains open to a diplomatic resolution with Iran even as American forces carried out a ninth consecutive night of strikes against Iranian targets. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, speaking to journalists before departing for an ASEAN summit in Manila, stated that Washington “always remains open to a diplomatic solution” and would welcome a resumption of dialogue. The remarks came hours after US Central Command confirmed a fresh wave of operations, and as the death toll of American service personnel in the nearly five-month conflict rose to 17 following separate incidents in northern Iraq and Jordan.

Viewed from Washington, the dual-track approach combines military pressure with an insistence that the door to negotiations is not closed. Rubio accused Tehran of violating a June memorandum of understanding — referred to in regional media as the Islamabad accord — that was designed to broaden a ceasefire and restore maritime traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. “They cannot have a memorandum of understanding in place if they are violating its terms,” he said, adding that Iran continues to launch missiles and drones at vessels. Energy Secretary Chris Wright, in a separate interview, framed the mission as essential to ensuring the free flow of oil and gas through the strait, stating that the US would guarantee transit “whether with Iranian cooperation or without it.” Wright said President Trump seeks a peaceful agreement but that military operations, originally planned for four to six weeks, have now extended into a fifth week.

From Tehran’s perspective, as reflected in Iranian media, the American diplomatic overtures are treated as unsubstantiated claims. Outlets describe the US strikes as “criminal” and assert that Washington itself violated the Islamabad understanding by pressuring Oman and regional partners to bypass provisions granting Iran management authority over the strait. According to this narrative, the opening of a southern shipping lane without Iranian consent triggered the renewed escalation. Iranian reports also highlight that officials have repeatedly stated the peaceful nature of the country’s nuclear programme, a point they say even some American figures have acknowledged.

The strategic stakes centre on the Strait of Hormuz, the chokepoint for a significant share of global oil shipments. The US Energy Secretary’s commitment to securing transit without Iranian cooperation signals a willingness to impose a maritime security architecture that circumvents Tehran’s claimed jurisdiction. Rubio’s warning that the failure of diplomacy “would not be good for Iran” and his reference to an economy “in tatters” underscore the economic dimension of the pressure campaign. Meanwhile, the human cost continues to mount: Rubio described the death of a soldier in Iraq as an accident during the disabling of a downed Iranian drone, and called the killing of two troops in Jordan by a missile that penetrated defences “heartbreaking.”

The diplomatic track remains formally open, but the operational reality on the ground is one of sustained hostilities. The memorandum of understanding that briefly raised hopes for de-escalation is now described by both sides as effectively void, with each blaming the other for its collapse. The US position, as articulated by Rubio and Wright, is that military operations will persist until Iran’s capacity to threaten shipping and its neighbours is degraded, while a negotiated exit remains possible if Tehran alters its behaviour. The next concrete step is likely to be further military and diplomatic signalling as Washington assesses whether the intensified campaign produces a shift in Iran’s posture.