Iran War at a Crossroads: Vance Signals ‘New Phase’, Trump Says Tehran Wants Deal as UN Mission Cites Possible US War Crimes
Vice President JD Vance says Washington is shifting from degrading Iran’s capabilities to preventing Tehran from rebuilding them, while President Donald Trump says the conflict may be nearing an end. Separately, a UN-mandated fact-finding mission says there are reasonable grounds to believe two US s
the evolving US-Iran conflict, diplomatic signalling and international scrutiny of military conduct
Table of Contents (23 sections)
The Iran war is entering a politically and militarily sensitive stage, with the Trump administration simultaneously talking about an eventual end to the conflict, preparing to prevent Iran from rebuilding damaged military capabilities and facing growing scrutiny over civilian casualties and presidential war powers.
Vice President JD Vance has described the conflict as moving towards a second phase in which Washington’s principal goal would shift from destroying Iranian capabilities to preventing Tehran from restoring them.
President Donald Trump, meanwhile, said on September 16 that the United States was “hopefully” approaching the end of the war and claimed Iran wanted to negotiate.
Recommended Reading
Related Stories & In-Depth Guides
Curated editorial perspectives matching this topic.
The Pentagon says all U.S. bombers deployed to RAF Fairford have returned to the United States following a suspected terrorism incident near the UK base. British investigators are examining possible foreign-state involvement, while Iran denies any role.
The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that arrested persons must receive the grounds of arrest in writing and in a language they understand, holding that Article 22(1) applies across criminal laws, including special statutes such as PMLA and UAPA.
But there is no ceasefire announcement or final settlement.
The war, which began on February 28 with US and Israeli attacks on Iran followed by Iranian retaliation against Israel and Gulf states hosting US forces, is now in its seventh month.
And while Washington is discussing what could come next, a new UN-backed investigation has introduced a serious legal dimension by finding reasonable grounds to believe two US strikes on the opening day of the war constituted war crimes.
Key Takeaways
Vice President JD Vance says the US-Iran conflict could enter a “much different phase” within the next couple of months.
Vance described the administration’s first phase as an effort to severely damage Iran’s nuclear, conventional military and regional power-projection capabilities. He said the next phase would focus on preventing Tehran from rebuilding.
Those descriptions are administration assessments, not an independently verified conclusion that Iran’s nuclear programme or military capability has been permanently destroyed.
President Donald Trump said on September 16 that the US was “hopefully” nearing the end of the war and claimed Iran wanted a deal and had contacted Washington directly. Tehran has not publicly confirmed that direct negotiations have resumed.
A UN-mandated independent fact-finding mission said on September 17 that it had “reasonable grounds” to believe US forces committed war crimes in two February 28 strikes in Iran.
The mission examined a strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab and another on a sports complex and residential area in Lamerd. It says the two strikes killed at least 178 civilians.
The UN finding is significant but is not a criminal conviction or binding court judgment.
The same mission separately concluded that Iranian authorities committed crimes against humanity during the repression of anti-government protests.
On September 15, the US House passed H.Con.Res. 93 by 220-204, directing the president under the War Powers Resolution to remove US armed forces from hostilities with Iran. Seven Republicans joined Democrats.
The House vote does not by itself end US military operations. Further congressional and legal steps remain.
Vance Says the ‘First Phase’ Is Over
Vance outlined what he described as a two-stage strategy during an interview published this week.
He said the administration considers the first phase to have focused on severely damaging Iran’s nuclear programme, conventional military forces and ability to project power across the region.
The second stage, according to Vance, would concentrate on ensuring Iran cannot rebuild those capabilities while trying to restore broader regional stability.
Vance predicted that the conflict could look substantially different within a couple of months.
That is an important signal about Washington’s intended strategy, but it does not necessarily mean all major military operations are ending immediately.
Vance did not provide a firm date for the end of hostilities, nor did he define exactly what military action could continue during the proposed second phase.
‘Prevent Iran From Rebuilding’ Is Now Central to US Strategy
The language used by Vance suggests the administration increasingly views long-term containment as central to its approach.
Rather than focusing only on destroying existing missiles, military facilities or nuclear infrastructure, the stated objective is to prevent Iran from repairing or replacing capabilities damaged during months of conflict.
That could involve sanctions, restrictions on access to technology and financing, maritime operations, intelligence activity and potentially additional military strikes if Washington believes reconstruction crosses its red lines.
Exactly how the policy will operate remains unclear.
Trump told Axios on September 17 that he was approaching a major decision point and was considering whether large-scale military operations might have to resume, underscoring that the possibility of renewed escalation has not disappeared.
Has Iran’s Nuclear Programme Actually Been Destroyed?
This part of Vance’s framing requires qualification.
The administration has repeatedly argued that military action inflicted severe damage on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.
But the International Atomic Energy Agency continues to face major gaps in its knowledge of Iran’s enriched uranium and nuclear facilities because inspectors lack full access to key sites.
Reuters reported earlier in September that the IAEA and Western governments were continuing to demand information and access regarding nuclear material at bombed facilities.
The agency has been unable to fully verify the status and location of important Iranian enriched-uranium stocks.
So statements that the nuclear programme has been “destroyed” represent a US administration assessment rather than a conclusively verified international finding.
A more precise description is that US and Israeli strikes have severely damaged important Iranian nuclear facilities and capabilities, while significant uncertainty remains over surviving material and Iran’s ability to reconstruct parts of the programme.
Trump Says Iran Wants a Deal
Trump struck a notably optimistic tone on September 16.
Asked about the conflict, he said the United States was “hopefully” nearing its end.
He also said Iran wanted to make an agreement and claimed he had recently heard from Tehran directly, rather than solely through mediators.
Trump did not explain who had contacted whom, what proposals were discussed or whether formal negotiations had resumed.
That distinction is important.
The president’s statement confirms his claim that direct contact occurred. It does not by itself establish that both governments have restarted formal negotiations or agreed on the terms of a settlement.
Tehran Has Not Confirmed Renewed Direct Negotiations
As of September 17, there was no public confirmation from Tehran matching Trump’s description of resumed direct negotiations.
A senior Iranian official had instead said talks would not resume until Iran’s conditions were met, while Iranian officials have continued to accuse Washington of failing to respect earlier understandings.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has nevertheless continued diplomatic contacts with other governments.
During talks in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi urged both Iran and the United States to exercise restraint, revive negotiations and restore safe navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
So there are signs of diplomatic activity, but not yet evidence of a completed peace process.
Trump Preparing Talks With Gulf Leaders
Diplomacy could intensify around next week’s United Nations General Assembly.
Reuters reported that Trump is expected to meet leaders or senior representatives from the six Gulf Cooperation Council countries — Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait and Oman — in New York.
The discussions are expected to include the Iran war and possible postwar arrangements.
The Gulf states have major interests in any settlement.
They face direct security risks from Iranian missiles, drones and allied armed groups, while disruptions to the Strait of Hormuz and wider regional shipping routes have also driven up energy-market risks.
The administration is therefore balancing military objectives against pressure from partners that want to avoid further regional escalation.
War Has Spread Beyond Iran
The conflict can no longer be viewed solely as a direct US-Iran confrontation.
Fighting involving Yemen’s Iran-aligned Houthis and Saudi Arabia has intensified, creating additional security risks around the Red Sea and Bab el-Mandeb shipping corridor.
Saudi and Houthi forces exchanged new strikes on September 17, while disruption around major maritime energy routes continued to affect global supply concerns.
The wider regional escalation complicates Trump’s suggestion that the core Iran war may soon wind down.
Even if Washington and Tehran reach some understanding, conflicts involving regional partners and armed groups may prove more difficult to stop simultaneously.
UN Mission Says There Are ‘Reasonable Grounds’ to Believe US Committed War Crimes
The most serious new legal development came from Geneva on September 17.
The Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Iran, established by the UN Human Rights Council and made up of independent experts, said it found reasonable grounds to believe the United States committed war crimes through two attacks carried out on February 28.
The mission examined two incidents:
the strike on the Shajareh Tayyebeh Primary School in Minab; and
a strike on a sports complex and surrounding residential area in Lamerd.
The mission says at least 178 civilians were killed across the two attacks.
Its conclusion was that the attacks were indiscriminate and caused civilian deaths, injuries and damage to civilian objects in circumstances that could amount to war crimes under international humanitarian law.
What the UN Mission Found About the Minab School
The Minab strike has been one of the most controversial incidents of the war.
The fact-finding mission concluded that the school building itself was the intended point of impact, rather than being accidentally damaged by a strike aimed exclusively at a nearby military installation.
Investigators said US forces had intelligence suggesting that a senior Iranian military commander might have been present but failed to adequately verify the information before launching the attack.
The mission said it found no evidence that the school was being used for military purposes at the time.
Iranian casualty accounts have varied, but the strike killed a large number of children.
The UN experts’ broader two-strike assessment places the confirmed or assessed civilian toll at at least 178.
US Has Not Accepted Responsibility for the School Strike
The US government has not publicly accepted responsibility for the Minab school strike or released the final findings of a Pentagon investigation into what happened, according to AP.
That is significant because the UN mission’s conclusion goes further than the public US position.
The report says evidence points to US responsibility and concludes that the strike amounted to an indiscriminate attack.
Those are serious findings.
But they remain the conclusions of an independent UN-mandated fact-finding body, not a ruling from an international criminal court.
Lamerd Strike Also Cited
The second incident examined occurred in Lamerd on February 28.
According to the mission, Precision Strike Missiles dispersed tungsten fragments over a sports complex and adjacent residential area.
The fact-finding team says 22 civilian men and women were killed in that strike.
US Central Command has denied responsibility for the Lamerd attack.
That means the UN mission’s attribution remains directly contested by the US military.
Any article stating simply that “the US bombed Lamerd” without acknowledging the denial would omit an important part of the evidentiary record.
Does the UN Report Mean the US Has Been Legally Convicted of War Crimes?
No.
This is one of the most important distinctions in reporting the development.
The mission says it has reasonable grounds to believe war crimes occurred.
Its report is not legally binding and does not itself convict US officials or military personnel.
The fact-finding mission can collect evidence, analyse conduct and make legal assessments.
It cannot conduct a criminal prosecution or impose a sentence.
Its evidence could, however, potentially be relevant in future accountability proceedings.
So the accurate wording is:
A UN-mandated independent mission has found reasonable grounds to believe the US committed war crimes.
It would be inaccurate to say:
“A UN court convicted the United States of war crimes.”
No such court judgment has occurred.
Same UN Report Accuses Iran of Crimes Against Humanity
The report is not limited to alleged US conduct.
The same experts concluded that Iranian authorities committed serious abuses during their repression of anti-government protests.
They said killings by Iranian security forces occurred on what they described as a “staggering scale” and found that multiple abuses — including murder, imprisonment, torture and other inhumane acts — amounted to crimes against humanity when carried out as part of a widespread or systematic attack on civilians.
The mission also cited arbitrary detention, attacks on protesters and healthcare workers and increased use of the death penalty.
Iran has rejected allegations that its authorities systematically committed such violations.
The report therefore presents findings concerning alleged serious international crimes by both the United States and the Iranian state, though arising from different conduct.
UN Investigation Faced Significant Limitations
The mission says its conclusions were based on interviews with 73 people inside and outside Iran, satellite imagery, photographs, videos, documentation and material supplied by organisations and experts.
But investigators also acknowledged obstacles.
The ongoing war, internet restrictions and limited cooperation from governments reduced access to information.
The experts said dozens of requests to Iranian authorities went unanswered, while requests made to the US government for information and meetings also went unanswered.
These limitations do not invalidate the report, but they are relevant when explaining the evidentiary basis and status of its conclusions.
House Votes 220-204 to Challenge Trump’s Iran War Powers
Congress is simultaneously escalating its own confrontation with the administration over the war.
On September 15, the House of Representatives passed H.Con.Res. 93, directing the president, under Section 5(c) of the War Powers Resolution, to remove United States armed forces from hostilities with Iran.
The official House Clerk recorded the vote as:
220 in favour
204 against
9 not voting
Seven Republicans joined 213 Democrats in voting for the measure.
Republicans supplied 203 of the “no” votes, while one independent also opposed it.
It Was the House’s Third Iran War Powers Vote
The September vote was the third time the House has moved to challenge Trump’s conduct of the Iran war through war-powers legislation, according to AP.
The latest resolution was sponsored by Democratic Representative Seth Moulton of Massachusetts.
Supporters argue that the Constitution gives Congress, not the president alone, authority over prolonged warfare and that US military involvement in Iran has continued without a specific congressional declaration of war.
Moulton described the resolution as an attempt to reclaim Congress’s war-making authority.
The administration and its allies dispute that interpretation and have defended the president’s authority to conduct military operations.
Seven Republicans Break With Their Party
The 220-204 result was politically significant because seven Republicans joined Democrats.
That represents greater Republican support for limiting the administration’s war powers than in earlier House votes.
The seven Republicans were reported as Thomas Massie, Nancy Mace, Brian Fitzpatrick, Warren Davidson, Tom Barrett, Mariannette Miller-Meeks and Zach Nunn.
Several face electorates where the war’s economic and human costs have become campaign issues ahead of the November midterms.
The vote therefore reflects not only a constitutional dispute over presidential power but an emerging political vulnerability for Republicans.
House Vote Does Not Automatically End the War
It is important not to overstate the effect of the resolution.
The House vote does not mean US forces were ordered to stop operations on September 15.
H.Con.Res. 93 has passed the House, but further congressional action and legal questions remain before the measure could have practical effect. The administration has also disputed congressional efforts to limit its military authority.
The measure is nevertheless politically significant because a House majority has now formally voted to direct the president to remove US forces from hostilities with Iran.
War Is Becoming a Midterm Election Issue
The conflict is increasingly intertwined with US domestic politics.
The war has contributed to higher oil and gasoline prices, while Republicans face difficult House and Senate contests ahead of November.
Reuters notes that energy-price increases resulting from the US-Israel conflict with Iran have become a significant political problem for Trump’s party.
That context makes Trump and Vance’s talk of a possible new phase especially consequential.
Their statements may reflect genuine strategic planning and diplomatic movement.
But claims about when the war will end are also being made in the middle of a heated election campaign.
No agreement has yet been announced that guarantees hostilities will end after the midterms.
What ‘New Phase’ Could Actually Mean
There are at least three plausible elements in what Vance calls the next phase.
The first is containment: preventing Iran from rebuilding missiles, military infrastructure and nuclear facilities.
The second is economic pressure, using sanctions and restrictions to make reconstruction more difficult.
The third is diplomacy, with Washington potentially seeking an agreement that addresses Iran’s nuclear programme, maritime security and regional military activity.
But the administration has not ruled out another path: renewed major strikes.
Trump’s latest comments to Axios indicate he is still weighing whether another large military operation may be necessary.
The “new phase” therefore should not automatically be translated as “peace”.
Bottom Line
The latest developments point to a genuine change in the political debate around the Iran war — but not yet a confirmed end to the conflict.
Vice President JD Vance says Washington considers the first phase of its campaign largely complete and now wants to stop Iran from rebuilding its nuclear, conventional military and regional power-projection capabilities.
President Donald Trump has gone further rhetorically, saying Iran wants a deal and that the United States is “hopefully” approaching the end of the war. He also claims Tehran has communicated directly with Washington.
Those claims have not yet produced a publicly confirmed peace agreement, and Tehran has not confirmed that formal direct negotiations have restarted.
At the same time, scrutiny of the conduct of the war has intensified.
An independent UN-mandated fact-finding mission says it has reasonable grounds to believe US forces committed war crimes in two February 28 attacks, including the strike on a school in Minab. The finding is serious but remains a non-binding investigative conclusion rather than a criminal conviction.
The same report also concludes that Iranian authorities committed crimes against humanity in their suppression of domestic protests.
And in Washington, the House has voted 220-204 to direct Trump to remove US forces from hostilities with Iran, with seven Republicans joining Democrats — the clearest recent indication that opposition to the war is crossing party lines.
The most accurate assessment as of September 17 is therefore:
The Iran war may be approaching a strategic transition, and diplomacy is again being discussed, but there is not yet a verified peace settlement. Military escalation remains possible, Congress is contesting the president’s war powers, and new UN findings have significantly intensified scrutiny of both US and Iranian conduct.
Key Takeaway
Vance signals shift to preventing Iran from rebuilding capabilities.
Trump claims Tehran wants a deal; no confirmed negotiations yet.
UN mission finds reasonable grounds for possible US war crimes in two strikes.
House votes 220-204 to challenge Trump’s war powers.
The Rajatheertha Team publishes news, explainers, guides and updates across India and the world. Our coverage follows Rajatheertha's editorial, verification and corrections standards.
The Jagdalpur court imposed capital punishment on all 10 people convicted in the 2013 Maoist ambush on a Congress convoy in Chhattisgarh. Two women are among those sentenced. The death sentences must still go through the High Court confirmation process, and the defence can appeal.
The Home Ministry has formally added the Shahzad Bhatti Network to the First Schedule of the UAPA, citing alleged cross-border arms, explosives and narcotics smuggling, recruitment of local criminals and the use of digital platforms for terror-related activity. The designation follows a multi-state
At least nine passengers died after an AC sleeper bus caught fire on the Yamuna Expressway near Jewar in Greater Noida. Police are investigating the cause, while a survivor’s complaint alleges warnings about a burning smell were ignored.
Three infants have died following a fire in the Special Newborn Care Unit at RIMS Adilabad. Officials are investigating a suspected AC-related electrical malfunction, while the Telangana government has ordered an inquiry and stronger hospital safety measures.
Tropical Storm Fay has strengthened to 70 mph over the eastern Atlantic, putting it just below hurricane intensity southwest of the Azores. Despite its strengthening overnight, forecasters now expect increasing wind shear to weaken Fay beginning Monday, while the rest of the Atlantic basin is foreca
Ukraine has confirmed striking the Moscow Oil Refinery during an extraordinary long-range drone and missile operation against Russia, while Russian authorities say hundreds of drones targeted the capital and more than 1,000 were intercepted across the country. At least three people were reported kil
0 Comments