At a NATO meeting in Turkey, Donald Trump declared the conflict with Iran "over." In nearly the same breath, he said he didn't care if talks with Tehran continued. That contradiction is more revealing than any insult he threw at the Iranian regime.

Here's what's actually happening: Trump's mixed messages suggest he has failed to achieve what he set out to do militarily, so he needs to talk his way to an end instead. BBC International Editor Jeremy Bowen interprets the sequence of Trump's statements — victory claims, military threats, and reluctant acceptance of negotiation — as an accidental admission that diplomacy is the only real option left.

The conflict started on 28 February when Israel and the United States killed Iran's supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Four months in, the central goal of breaking Iran's will has not worked. Bowen is clear: Washington and Israel tried to destroy the Iranian government and failed. Iran has held firm on what matters most to it: controlling shipping routes through the Strait of Hormuz, a vital global energy chokepoint, despite sustained American military pressure.

Trump said in June that a deal was near. But early on he already faced a harder question: if the war ends in negotiated agreement, what was the whole conflict for? Before that, Bowen had written that Trump needs this war to end but Iran shows no intention of backing down. This week's contradictory remarks confirm that earlier reporting.

Talks stalled but not dead

Washington and Tehran had paused discussions while Iran held funeral services for Khamenei. A draft agreement between the two sides, known as a memorandum of understanding, has been under negotiation. Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner are leading the US side. Trump dismissed their efforts bluntly: "I don't care, they can talk. But I think they're wasting their time." Yet in the same comments he threatened to strike Iran "harder again tonight," claiming he had warned them first. He also called the Iranian leadership "a bunch of lying guys."

A source among the negotiators called recent developments "a setback for sure," with the atmosphere "very tense." That kind of language from mediators — who normally avoid strong criticism — signals that the talks have genuinely hit trouble.

Trump's conflicting statements matter because they expose what is really going on. A president who says the war is won, then orders new military strikes hours later, is not announcing a victory. He is talking publicly about a stalemate, using language aimed at his home audience rather than at diplomats. When Bowen points out that Trump is allowing talks to continue, it suggests Trump has run out of military options. This is what happens in tough negotiations: one side acts tough to show strength, but quietly keeps communication channels open because neither side can force the other to give in.

Why the strong language keeps happening

Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have wanted more than just weakening Iran militarily. They have aimed to reshape the entire Middle East order. By that measure, an agreement that leaves Iran's government standing and the Strait still contested would be a thin result compared to what they promised at the start. That gap between big promises and modest outcomes is why Bowen asks: what was this war actually supposed to accomplish?

Looking across the region tells the same story. In Lebanon, fighting continues even though Israel and Hezbollah have a ceasefire supposedly in place. Bowen has called such situations "space but not a solution." Across the region, ceasefires have frozen conflicts rather than solved them. The big disagreements — about territory, about who gets to maintain military strength, about regional power — remain unresolved.

Nobody knows yet if the draft agreement will be finalized. Talks are still stalled. What matters now is that Trump's tough talk and his willingness to negotiate are happening at the same time, not one after the other. Whether this leads to a signed deal or more fighting depends on something that has barely budged in months: Iran's determination to keep control of the Strait, and America's apparent inability to force that surrender through military action alone.