President Donald Trump indicated Tuesday that his administration is actively engaging with an intermediary figure, "Ronn," as part of ongoing back-channel diplomacy tied to a sweeping and highly controversial 10-point proposal submitted by Iran.

The plan is believed to have dangerous provisions, including protection for Hezbollah and Iran given the right to collect tolls from ships moving through the Strait of Hormuz.

The emerging framework, which Trump described as "significant" but "not good enough," marks a notable shift in tone after days of escalating threats of military action.

In a social media post, Trump confirmed he would delay planned U.S. strikes on Iranian infrastructure — including bridges and power plants — for two weeks, contingent on the immediate reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint.

The pause comes amid intensifying diplomatic efforts, with talks scheduled to begin in Islamabad later this week.

The proposal, delivered through intermediaries including Pakistan, outlines a broad cessation of hostilities between Iran, the United States, and Israel.

However, several of its provisions have sparked alarm in Washington and among U.S. allies, particularly its call for a halt to military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Key Demands in Iran's 10-Point Proposal

• Reopening of the Strait of Hormuz under Iranian military coordination
• Immediate end to war against all elements of Iran's "Axis of Resistance"
• Full withdrawal of U.S. forces from Middle East bases
• Establishment of a secure maritime transit protocol
• Lifting of all U.S. primary and secondary sanctions
• Release of frozen Iranian financial assets abroad
• Compensation or reconstruction funding for war damages
• Guarantee that Iran will not face further military attacks
• End to Israeli strikes on Hezbollah in Lebanon
• Regional de-escalation measures involving allied militias

Points Potentially Under Discussion or Tentatively Agreed

• Conditional reopening of the Strait of Hormuz
• Framework for a temporary or permanent ceasefire
• Maritime security coordination mechanisms
• Use of shipping fees for transit through the Strait (approximately $2 million per vessel) to fund reconstruction instead of direct U.S. compensation

While no official confirmation has been given on which elements Washington may accept, analysts suggest the ceasefire framework and shipping arrangements are the most viable starting points.

However, the Strait has long been viewed as a legal channel of international shipping, not requiring any toll payment to Iran or any other nation. Giving Iran toll power could set an extremely dangerous precedent.

Also, the inclusion of a demand that Israel cease attacks on Hezbollah is among the most contentious provisions.

Such a concession would represent a dramatic departure from long-standing U.S. and Israeli policy, which has consistently targeted the Iran-backed group as a major regional threat.

Equally controversial is the call for a full U.S. military withdrawal from the region.

Though successive administrations have discussed reducing troop presence, a complete exit would mark a historic shift in American foreign policy and security posture in the Middle East.

Notably absent from Iran's proposal is any commitment to halt its nuclear program — long a central demand of the Trump administration.

This omission raises questions about whether a broader agreement could satisfy U.S. strategic objectives.

The current negotiation framework contrasts sharply with Trump's earlier stance.

Trump had also previously emphasized:

• The need for "regime change" in Iran
• The dismantling of Iran's nuclear program 
• Unconditional reopening of key shipping routes

His acknowledgment that the U.S. is now working within a negotiation framework —  potentially mediated by figures like Ronn — signals a pragmatic pivot, even as he maintains that the current proposal falls short.

Experts say the moment presents both risk and opportunity.

Alex Vatanka of the Middle East Institute noted that despite "significant gaps," the structure of the talks suggests a viable path toward de-escalation.

"You have a window here to prevent disaster," he said.

"They're talking in a way that at least allows for a basic framework to emerge."

Still, the political and strategic costs of accepting elements of Iran's proposal — particularly those involving Hezbollah and U.S. troop withdrawal — could prove difficult for the administration to justify domestically and among allies, notably Israel.