The United States kept the threat of renewed strikes against Iran on the table Saturday, with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth saying U.S. forces are ready to resume attacks if diplomacy fails to produce a settlement that meets Washington’s demands.

Hegseth’s comments, delivered at the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, came as U.S. and Iranian negotiators remained locked in talks over a proposed extension of an early-April ceasefire. The plan under discussion would keep the truce in place for another 60 days while negotiators seek a broader agreement to end the conflict, according to reporting by Reuters and India Today.

“Our ability to recommence if necessary … we are more than capable,” Hegseth said in Singapore, according to Reuters. He added that U.S. stockpiles were sufficient to support operations in the Middle East and elsewhere, signaling that the Pentagon does not view the Iran standoff as limiting its wider global posture.

The warning underscored the core tension in Washington’s approach: the Trump administration is trying to hold open a diplomatic path while making clear that military action remains available if Tehran rejects U.S. red lines. Hegseth said President Donald Trump remains patient and wants what he called a “great deal” that ensures Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon.

The proposed deal has been described as a temporary bridge rather than a final settlement. Its most immediate goal would be to extend the ceasefire and restore unrestricted shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway whose disruption has intensified pressure on energy markets and raised costs for consumers and businesses. Reuters reported that the Strait carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supply, making any restrictions there a direct concern for U.S. inflation, gasoline prices and global supply chains.

Trump said Friday that he would meet in a secure White House room to make a “final determination” on the proposal. A White House official later told Reuters that the Situation Room meeting lasted about two hours but did not say whether Trump had made a decision. The official said Trump would only accept a deal that was “good for America” and satisfied his red lines, including the demand that Iran never possess a nuclear weapon.

That public position has collided with competing accounts from Tehran. Reuters reported that a senior Iranian source said an agreement was close but had not yet been approved. Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency, citing sources, accused Trump of trying to portray a “fabricated victory” and said the potential deal did not include nuclear-related issues. Iranian officials have also indicated that management of the Strait of Hormuz must involve Iran and Oman, while Washington has rejected tolls or restrictions on commercial passage.

The disagreement over Hormuz is central because it links military de-escalation to economic relief. Trump has demanded that the waterway be immediately open to shipping in both directions, with no tolls and no restrictions. Reuters reported that the U.S. position includes removing mines and allowing stranded vessels to move, while Iran-linked reporting has said any reopening would occur under Tehran’s conditions after U.S. restrictions on Iranian ships are lifted.

Another unresolved issue is money. Iran has demanded sanctions relief and access to frozen assets. Reuters reported that Fars said there was agreement to release $12 billion of Iran’s frozen assets, while Trump said no money would be exchanged “until further notice.” The gap illustrates how each side is trying to claim leverage without confirming the same terms.

The nuclear question remains the hardest political and security issue for Washington. Trump has said Iran must dismantle its capacity to make a nuclear weapon, while Tehran has long maintained that its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Reuters reported that Kazakhstan has been discussed as a possible destination for Tehran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium in the event of a deal, citing comments by International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi to the Financial Times. But Iranian-linked accounts have pushed back on claims that Tehran has agreed to destroy or transfer nuclear material under the current draft.

The risk of renewed fighting is not abstract. Reuters reported that recent flare-ups included U.S. Central Command shooting down Iranian attack drones and striking a ground control station in Bandar Abbas, while Kuwait intercepted a ballistic missile fired toward the country, which hosts a major U.S. base. A U.S. official described the strikes as defensive and intended to maintain the ceasefire. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps said it had targeted the U.S. base responsible for the Bandar Abbas attack and warned of a stronger response if attacks continued.

The conflict began Feb. 28 with U.S. and Israeli military action against Iran, according to Reuters, and has since killed thousands of people, mainly in Iran and Lebanon. The war has also widened pressure across the region, where Israel’s campaign against Iran-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon remains unresolved. Iran has said any peace deal should also address Israel’s attacks in Lebanon, a condition that adds another layer of complexity for U.S. negotiators.

For the Trump administration, the stakes are both geopolitical and domestic. A durable truce could reduce pressure on energy prices and lower the risk to U.S. personnel stationed across the Gulf. But any agreement that appears to soften demands on Iran’s nuclear program, release assets or lift sanctions could draw criticism from Iran hawks in Washington. Conversely, renewed strikes could rally hard-line support but risk another round of escalation, retaliatory attacks on U.S. bases and deeper disruption to shipping.

Hegseth also used his remarks in Singapore to reject the idea that the Iran conflict has distracted the United States from Asia. He said Washington can manage multiple security challenges at once and is expanding its defense industrial base to support global operational plans. The message was aimed partly at Indo-Pacific allies concerned that Middle East crises could dilute U.S. attention from China and regional deterrence.

As of Saturday, no final breakthrough had been announced. The public record points instead to an agreement framework whose most contested provisions remain under dispute. Washington says Iran must accept nuclear limits and reopen Hormuz without conditions. Iranian-linked accounts say Tehran has not accepted the U.S. version of those terms and is still seeking sanctions relief, asset access and a settlement that protects its claimed rights in the waterway.

That leaves the ceasefire diplomacy in a narrow corridor: close enough for officials to keep negotiating, but fragile enough that a single military incident or public dispute over terms could derail it. Hegseth’s warning made clear that, from Washington’s perspective, the talks are proceeding under the shadow of force.