Iran Rejects US Talks as Trump’s Mixed Signals Deepen Hormuz Standoff

Iran’s top security official on Tuesday ruled out any negotiations with the United States, dismissing President Donald Trump’s suggestion that he was open to talks as “mixed signals” and insisting that Tehran’s conditions must be met before any dialogue can begin.

“Don’t get distracted by the U.S. president’s mixed signals — from ‘no negotiations’ to ‘we’re ready to talk’,” Mohsen Rezaei, secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, posted on X. “The stakes around oil and the straits have changed. Damage control won’t stop what’s coming. No talks until Iran’s conditions are met. Period!”

Trump said on Monday that he was open to holding talks with Iran, after weeks of saying it was too early to make a deal to end the Middle East war. “The failing Nation of Iran wants to make a deal, quickly and badly. I will determine whether or not the U.S.A. will choose to engage — The concept of which we are open to,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social network. The statement marked a sharp reversal from Trump’s remarks just days earlier. On September 9, he told reporters at Andrews Air Force Base that the US was “not looking for” negotiations with Iran. “Originally, I wanted to make a deal. We’re so far down the line; they have very little country left right now. So we’re not looking for it,” he said at the time.

Tehran has repeatedly listed demands as preconditions for ending the war and its blockade on the Strait of Hormuz. According to Iranian officials, these include a definitive end to the war and all aggression against Iran and its regional allies, lifting the naval blockade imposed on Iranian ports, full compensation for war damages, removal of sanctions against Iran’s economy, and the unconditional release of frozen Iranian assets abroad. Rezaei’s rejection came as Tehran and Muscat postponed talks between Iran and Gulf Arab states that had been scheduled for Monday. Iran’s Fars news agency reported that the postponement was made “at the request of some countries in the region and was a joint decision by Tehran and Muscat”.

READ ALSO:

• Saudi Arabia Vows ‘Firm’ Response as Houthi Attacks Wound 13
• Peter Obi Rejects Anambra Debt Claims, Challenges Soludo Govt to Produce Evidence
• Peter Obi: Release My UNN Academic Records, I Have Nothing to Hide

The diplomatic standoff unfolds against a backdrop of continuing violence in the Strait of Hormuz. On Sunday, an attack on an Iranian commercial cargo vessel killed one person and wounded four others, according to Iranian state media. The same weekend, an attack on the commercial vessel MT El Gaia left one Indian crew member missing and 13 rescued. The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations (UKMTO) has reported multiple incidents involving merchant vessels in the strategic waterway, advising mariners to “consider the latest maritime security information and maintain awareness of the evolving operational environment”. Oman, which has emerged as a key mediator in the conflict, saw its Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi announce the postponement of the Gulf talks “in the interests of consensus.” “We remain committed to fostering dialogue that supports stability and lasting cooperation in our region,” he said on X.

The Strait of Hormuz remains a central point of contention. Before the war began in late February, about one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas supplies were shipped through the waterway. Traffic has since plummeted amid continued security risks. Brent crude futures jumped more than 2 per cent on Tuesday, trading above $107 per barrel as the diplomatic impasse deepened. Trump has pushed to restore shipping through the strait to pre-war levels to bring down energy prices ahead of November’s midterm elections. But Tehran has shown no sign of relinquishing what it regards as a key source of strategic leverage.

The latest exchange fits a broader pattern of conflicting signals from Washington. In June, the United States and Iran signed a framework agreement that included provisions for a $300 billion private investment fund to rebuild Iran’s economy. Negotiations were scheduled to conclude within 60 days, but the process stalled amid renewed hostilities. Iranian officials have repeatedly dismissed contradictory statements from Washington as political messaging rather than evidence of a genuine diplomatic opening. Tehran has stressed that any future diplomatic process would require concrete guarantees rather than verbal commitments, arguing that previous US reversals have undermined trust.

Iran Rejects US Talks as Trump’s Mixed Signals Deepen Hormuz Standoff

Trump’s $5,000 Dividend: Big Cash Promise Raises $1.2tn Funding Question

With America’s crucial midterm elections looming, President Donald Trump has dangled a potentially massive financial windfall before voters, promising a $5,000 “dividend” for every adult US citizen if Republicans retain control of Congress—a pledge that could cost the government more than $1.2 trillion and is already raising questions over how the ambitious giveaway would be funded.

Trump unveiled the proposal as Republicans gear up for the November midterm elections, linking the proposed cash payment directly to a GOP victory in both chambers of Congress.

The President has argued that booming economic activity and revenue generated by his administration’s policies, particularly tariffs, would provide the resources for the payments.

But the scale of the promise has immediately put the spotlight on the numbers: with roughly 240 million adult Americans potentially eligible, a $5,000 payment could carry a price tag of about $1.2 trillion, far exceeding current tariff revenues.

More importantly, the proposed dividend is not yet an approved government payment. Congress would have to pass legislation authorising the scheme and determine its eligibility rules and funding mechanism.

The proposal therefore leaves Trump with a politically potent election-year promise—and Congress with a potentially trillion-dollar bill if Republicans emerge from the midterms with control of the legislature.

“If the Republicans win the House of Representatives and the United States Senate… I will issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000,” Trump said.

The White House subsequently formally promoted the proposal as a $5,000 cash payment to every adult American citizen, describing it as a way for Americans to share in what the administration says are the benefits of its economic policies.

Trump compared the proposed payment to a dividend distributed by a successful company to its shareholders, arguing that Americans should benefit directly from the country’s economic gains.

He also indicated that the money would have to be spent within the United States, potentially directing a huge injection of cash into the domestic economy.

GOP victory condition

The proposed dividend, however, is tied directly to the outcome of the November midterm elections.

Trump’s promise is conditional on Republicans maintaining control of both the House of Representatives and the Senate.

That has given the proposal an unmistakable political dimension, coming as the Republican Party prepares for a difficult midterm contest in which control of Congress is at stake.

READ ALSO:

• Sanwo-Olu Joins Dangote as Historic N2.15tn Refinery IPO Opens on Nigerian Exchange 
• Shehu Buba Submits Himself To DSS Over Banditry Allegations
• No Lives Lost as Responders Contain Dual Fire Outbreaks Across Lagos

Trump has insisted that the proposed payments are affordable and has dismissed concerns about the government’s ability to finance them.

But the proposal has immediately run into a major hurdle: Congressional approval.

House Speaker Mike Johnson has said legislation would be required before the government could make the payments, contradicting any suggestion that Trump could simply order the money to be distributed.

Over $1 trillion price tag

The size of the proposed programme is enormous.

Depending on the final eligibility requirements and the number of recipients, estimates put the total cost at between $1.2 trillion and $1.35 trillion.

That would make the proposed dividend one of the largest direct cash-transfer programmes in American history.

The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget has estimated that giving $5,000 to every adult citizen could cost more than $1.2 trillion and substantially increase the federal deficit.

The organisation warned that such a programme would come on top of an already substantial US budget deficit and could worsen the country’s debt position.

The United States has already crossed the $40 trillion national debt threshold, according to recent reports, adding to concerns among fiscal conservatives about another massive federal spending commitment.

Where will the money come from?

The source of the money remains one of the biggest unanswered questions.

Trump has pointed to the strength of the economy and the revenue generated by his administration’s tariff policies.

Vice President JD Vance has also discussed tariff revenue as a potential source of funding, although the amount required for the proposed payments is substantially larger than the revenue generated by tariffs so far.

Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick has offered another potential source, suggesting that part of the funding could come from a new visa programme.

But questions remain over whether these sources could generate enough money to finance a $5,000 payment to every eligible adult.

The scale of the challenge is illustrated by the mathematics: a $5,000 payment to roughly 240 million adult US citizens would require around $1.2 trillion.

Economists raise inflation concerns

Beyond the funding question, economists and fiscal policy analysts have raised concerns about what could happen if more than $1 trillion were injected into the economy.

Because recipients would receive large cash payments that could be spent on goods and services, economists warn that the programme could increase consumer demand and potentially add to inflationary pressure.

Critics also argue that borrowing to finance the payments would further increase the federal government’s debt burden and place upward pressure on interest rates.

Trump, however, has rejected the criticism and maintained that the payments would be affordable because of what he describes as unprecedented economic growth and revenue generation.

He has also rejected suggestions that the proposal amounts to an attempt to influence voters ahead of the midterms.

Not yet an approved payment

Despite the excitement generated by the announcement, the proposed $5,000 dividend is not currently an approved government payment.

There is no enacted law giving American adults an automatic entitlement to the money.

Congress would have to authorise the programme, establish eligibility requirements and determine how it would be financed before payments could be made.

There is also uncertainty over exactly who would qualify.

Trump initially described the beneficiaries as every adult US citizen, while subsequent comments from members of his administration have raised questions about whether higher-income Americans could be excluded.

Another Trump cash-payment promise

The proposal is also drawing attention because it follows earlier Trump proposals for direct payments to Americans.

Trump previously floated the idea of a $2,000 tariff-funded dividend, but that payment has not been distributed.

The new $5,000 proposal is considerably larger and would represent a major expansion of the direct-payment concept.

Trump has nevertheless doubled down on the latest promise, arguing that his administration’s economic policies have created sufficient resources to return money directly to Americans.

For now, however, the “Trump Dividend” remains a political promise rather than a guaranteed cheque.

Its implementation would depend on the outcome of the midterm elections, subsequent congressional action, agreement on funding and the final rules governing who would receive the money.

Trump’s $5,000 Dividend: Big Cash Promise Raises $1.2tn Funding Question

US Judge Blocks Trump Visa Rules for Foreign Students, Journalists

A new Trump administration policy aimed at placing tighter time limits on foreign students and journalists in the United States has been put on hold by a federal court.

The decision came from US District Judge F. Dennis Saylor on Monday, hours before the Department of Homeland Security was expected to begin enforcing the new rules.

The policy would have replaced the long-standing system that allows international students to remain in the US for the duration of their approved studies. Instead, most student visa holders would have been given a fixed period of up to four years and would then need to seek an extension.

Foreign journalists would also have faced shorter periods of stay. The proposed limit was 240 days, while Chinese journalists would have been restricted to 90 days, subject to possible extensions.

Universities, educators and journalists challenged the policy in court, arguing that the changes could disrupt education, research and media work.

READ ALSO:

• 2027: Northern Lecturers Back Tinubu, ASUU Disowns Endorsement
• ‘I Was Never the Chosen One’ — Dembele Responds to Mbappe
• Police Arrest Mother Over Alleged Brutal Abuse of 7-Year-Old Girl in Anambra

Saylor has now temporarily stopped DHS from putting the rules into effect. He did not make a final ruling on the wider legal challenge and has scheduled another hearing for October 2.

In his ruling, the judge questioned whether DHS had properly explained the need for such a major change. He also expressed concern that visa extension decisions could become highly discretionary, leaving foreign students, researchers and journalists with limited options if their applications were rejected.

Saylor further criticised the administration’s national security justification, describing it as exceptionally weak and questioning whether less restrictive measures had been considered.

The ruling means the new restrictions will not take effect for now. The case will continue in court as the Trump administration defends the policy.

The US hosted more than 1.1 million international students during the 2023-24 academic year, making it the world’s leading destination for international education.

US Judge Blocks Trump Visa Rules for Foreign Students, Journalists