The United States and Iran have signaled that they would prefer to avoid resuming the conflict between them, which has remained on hold since the April 8 ceasefire.

Neither country has allowed military attacks on either side to derail their talks, in which Pakistan, Qatar and other actors act as mediators.

Washington maintains powerful naval and air forces at a distance that allows it to reach Iranian territory.

And everything indicates that the Iranian regime has kept its forces on high alert and is taking advantage of the ceasefire to reorganize and repair the damage caused by the US and Israeli attacks.

Military tensions in and around the Gulf region raise the risk of miscalculations and misunderstandings between both sides.

Washington is trying to maintain pressure on the Tehran regime to force concessions, demonstrating that it is close and has a high capacity to inflict great damage on its adversary.

For its part, Iran insists that its determination to resist remains intact and warns that, if necessary, it will attack US bases and infrastructure in the Arab Gulf countries.

The first goals on what could be a very long road to a broader US-Iran deal are to maintain the ceasefire and move toward a “memorandum of understanding” that sets the agenda for future negotiations.

However, getting to that point is proving difficult.

Israel's warning that Beirut, Lebanon's capital, could face more bombing has further reduced Donald Trump's room for maneuver.

Meanwhile, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu does not seem concerned that a new offensive in Lebanon will complicate a US-Iran deal. Netanyahu never supported the ceasefire with Tehran and believes that any agreement between Washington and Tehran would not be beneficial enough.

Iran, for its part, continues to support Hezbollah, its ally in Lebanon.

Tehran has signaled that a broader agreement with the US will have to include a halt to the Israeli offensive.

But for now, President Trump appears to be trying to contain Israel.

As for the Strait of Hormuz, the Iranian regime will demand a price for its reopening, possibly in the form of sanctions relief or the release of frozen assets, which is emerging as a prerequisite for moving forward in serious negotiations.

Currently, only a small number of vessels manage to traverse what was once a vital and busy shipping lane. Iran closed it after the attacks by the US and Israel on February 28.

Caught in the aftermath of war

Some countries have tried to find alternatives.

Saudi Arabia is channeling some of its oil to its Red Sea ports, while the United Arab Emirates (UAE) has a pipeline that takes crude to terminals on its small coastal strip facing the Gulf of Oman, beyond the Strait of Hormuz.

But the rest of the world has lost about 20% of its usual supply of oil and gas, as well as other key exports.

Keeping the strait closed is a serious blow to much of the world economy.

The US no longer depends on Gulf oil, but the price of gasoline in the country is set by the global market.

Trump finds himself in a difficult position, caught in the fallout of a war he thought would be easy.

The American president and his ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, decisively underestimated the Iranian regime's willingness to resist and endure the attacks.

There is no easy way out for Trump, and the Iranian regime wants to make sure it stays that way.

He needs to achieve the reopening of the strait. Furthermore, the war against Iran generates strong opposition in the US, and a new escalation would only increase internal rejection.

The difficulty of concessions

The problem for Trump is that the concessions that Iran would demand to reopen the strait are rejected both by the hardest sectors of the Republican party and by his own desire to project an image of victory.

The US president is especially averse to any unfavorable comparison between an eventual deal with Iran – even if it is limited to extending the ceasefire for a new round of negotiations – and the nuclear deal reached under President Barack Obama in 2015.

Trump condemned that agreement. And during his first term in the White House, he withdrew his country from the pact.

On the other hand, Iranian leaders believe, with some justification, that they are fighting for the survival of their regime.

It seems clear that further US strikes, with or without Israel, will not change that position.

The rich oil monarchies of the Gulf have already suffered great economic damage and do not want it to worsen.

Its business model and the long-term development of its countries is based on the idea that the Gulf is a stable region, a center of the global economy and a safe place for foreign investment.

The war has dealt them a severe blow, and recovering their image of stability will take years.

Qatar is participating as a full mediator, along with Pakistan, in the diplomatic attempt to revive the talks.

The UAE and Saudi Arabia have responded to Iran with different approaches.

The Emirates have strengthened their strategic relationship with Israel, which has deployed the Iron Dome anti-missile defense system in Emirati territory, along with soldiers from the Israel Defense Forces to operate it.

It has also emerged that Saudi Arabia has carried out attacks against Iran, it claims, in response to Iranian offensives.

However, high-level Saudi sources stress that they made it clear to Tehran that they were acting independently and not as part of the US-Israel coalition.

When Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu went to war with Iran, both believed their countries' air power would be enough to force the fall of the Islamic regime in Tehran.

But they were wrong.

They underestimated the nature of a regime that has survived for almost half a century despite several wars, sanctions and isolation.

Now, both the US and Israel are facing the consequences of the war. And the rest of the world too.