WASHINGTON — The United States said Friday that it remains prepared to negotiate with Iran over its nuclear program, but warned that continued attacks on commercial shipping, civilian targets or regional security infrastructure would bring an American response and broader international accountability.

Deputy U.S. Representative to the United Nations Tammy Bruce delivered the message during a Security Council session focused on Iran and nuclear nonproliferation. She said Washington and Tehran had achieved progress by signing the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, an interim framework negotiated with Pakistani mediation, but emphasized that a final settlement would require Iran to honor its commitments.

“The door to diplomacy remains open, and is our preferred path to resolve concerns related to Iran’s nuclear program,” Bruce said, according to a report by Anadolu Agency. She added that the United States hoped Iran would return to compliance with its obligations and participate seriously in talks aimed at reaching a lasting agreement.

Bruce paired that diplomatic offer with a warning that negotiations could not continue normally while Washington believes Tehran is violating basic terms of the interim arrangement. She said the United States was prepared to hold Iran accountable for conduct that defies international peace and security and would respond if civilian objects or commercial vessels were attacked.

The statement reflects the Trump administration’s increasingly explicit effort to separate continued negotiations from the status of the cease-fire. President Donald Trump said Friday that Iran had asked the United States to continue talks and that Washington had agreed. At the same time, he reiterated that the cease-fire reached in June was “over,” signaling that the administration no longer considers the interim military pause binding in its previous form.

That combination leaves U.S. policy operating on two tracks: technical negotiations remain active, while military action remains available in response to what Washington identifies as Iranian violations. Two U.S. officials told Reuters that technical discussions were continuing and that the United States had not conducted additional strikes during the latest pause in operations. The officials described Washington as still committed to seeking a diplomatic resolution despite the renewed fighting.

The latest escalation followed attacks on three commercial vessels near the Strait of Hormuz, which the United States and several regional governments attributed to Iran. Tehran has disputed the American account of events and has accused Washington of violating the Islamabad understanding through renewed sanctions and military operations. The competing claims illustrate a central weakness in the interim agreement: both governments say the other side acted first and breached provisions intended to prevent renewed conflict.

U.S. Central Command said American forces struck about 90 targets across Iran during the latest operation, including air-defense systems, missile and drone facilities, coastal surveillance assets and other military infrastructure. The command said the strikes were intended to reduce Iran’s ability to threaten navigation through the Strait of Hormuz. Iran responded with missile and drone attacks directed at installations used by U.S. forces in Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Jordan.

Regional governments reported intercepting much of the incoming fire. Kuwait said falling debris injured one person after its forces intercepted missiles and drones, while Jordan said it intercepted Iranian projectiles without reporting casualties or significant damage. Bahrain, where the U.S. Navy’s 5th Fleet is headquartered, also reported defensive operations against incoming attacks. There was no immediate indication of American military deaths from the Iranian retaliation.

The exchange renewed concern that a limited confrontation could expand across a region hosting tens of thousands of U.S. service members. American forces operate from bases and facilities in Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan and other partner countries, making Iranian attacks on those locations a direct test of Washington’s deterrence posture. A sustained cycle of retaliation could also draw additional governments into the conflict even when they are seeking to act primarily as mediators or defensive partners.

The Strait of Hormuz remains one of the most consequential points of dispute. Before the conflict, roughly one-fifth of internationally traded oil and natural gas moved through the waterway. Commercial traffic has recovered only partially following earlier interruptions, leaving energy markets sensitive to new attacks, mining threats or military restrictions. Any prolonged closure would affect U.S. consumers through higher oil prices, increased shipping insurance costs and pressure on global supply chains.

The Islamabad memorandum was designed to stop military operations, reopen maritime commerce and establish a limited period for negotiating a broader settlement. Its provisions reportedly required Iran to preserve the status quo of its nuclear program while the United States refrained from imposing additional sanctions or increasing its regional military presence. The framework also anticipated talks on a final agreement, with nuclear restrictions and sanctions relief among the most difficult unresolved issues.

The latest hostilities have placed nearly every part of that framework under strain. Washington says Iranian attacks on shipping justified military and economic consequences. Tehran says renewed U.S. strikes and sanctions measures violated American commitments. Mediators including Pakistan, Oman and Qatar have continued contacts with both governments in an attempt to prevent further escalation and restore a workable negotiating process.

The United Nations has warned that renewed confrontation could erase recent diplomatic progress. Secretary-General António Guterres expressed alarm over the return of military exchanges in the Gulf and urged efforts to prevent another slide into sustained conflict. The Security Council discussions have also exposed divisions over responsibility, nuclear oversight and the legal basis for military operations by both sides.

For the United States, the immediate objective appears to be preserving enough diplomatic contact to negotiate a nuclear and security agreement without giving Tehran immunity from retaliation. Bruce’s remarks presented continued talks as conditional rather than unconditional: Washington remains available for diplomacy, but expects measurable Iranian compliance and reserves the right to respond to attacks.

The next phase will depend on whether the technical channel can produce enforceable arrangements before another maritime or military incident triggers fresh strikes. With the cease-fire no longer recognized by Washington as fully operative, even a limited attack could quickly overwhelm the remaining diplomatic process. The administration’s message Friday was that negotiations are still possible, but the costs of further violations will rise.