Name: Iran calls Trump’s claim of peace talks “fake news” to manipulate markets | BBC News
Uploaded: 2026-03-24T23:03:08.000Z
Duration: 14 min 11 s
Description: Thousands of YouTube videos with English-Chinese subtitles! Now you can learn to understand native speakers, expand your vocabulary, and improve your pronunciation...

In a reversal of his position at the weekend, Donald Trump now says the US has held talks with what he called the top reasonable person in Iran,

and claims that Tehran wants to make a deal allowing him to pull back for five days from his threatened strikes on Iran's energy infrastructure.

But Iran says no such talks have taken place.

Trump said he would obliterate Iran's power plants unless it reopened the crucial shipping channel, the Strait of Hormuz, by midnight tonight.

Well, after his comments, high oil prices fell and stock markets rebounded, prompting the leader of Iran's parliament to suggest fake news is being used to manipulate the oil markets.

We'll be examining the economic impact of Mr.

Trump's latest words, and we'll be asking our international editor, Jeremy Bowen, to shed light on those negotiations.

But first, here's our diplomatic correspondent, James Landale, with the story of the day.

The day began with the United States threatening more of this, only not on Iran's military targets, but

"They'd be obliterated," Donald Trump had said, "unless the Strait of Hormuz was reopened tonight." But then suddenly, as he prepared to board Air Force One, an about-turn.

The president put off the attack for five days after what he called productive conversations with Iran.

and it's got to be no more wars, no more nuclear weapons.

It also potentially might involve the US and Iran sharing control of the flow of oil.

You want the United States to be a controller?

Me and the Ayatollah, whoever the Ayatollah is, whoever the next Ayatollah.

But the threat of more military action remained.

Uh, we'll at some point very, very soon meet.

And if it goes well, we're going to end up with, uh, settling this.

Otherwise, we'll just keep bombing our little hearts out.

Trump said his envoyes had spoken last night to a top Iranian official.

He wouldn't say who, apart from denying it was the new Supreme Leader, Mojtaba Khamenei.

As markets opened in the US, traders seized on what they hoped was better news: the value of stocks rebounding, the price of oil falling, at least for a time.

And all the while, the Strait of Hormuz remained too dangerous for most tankers to pass under the threat of Iranian attack,

and Israel continued its bombardments of Tehran, the country's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, saying President Trump had told him a deal was possible.

So Donald Trump is now talking of deals and negotiations, a potential way out of the impasse he faces.

But how real and developed these talks are remains unclear.

Well, let's go straight to Washington and to Garry O'Donohue.

Garry, yesterday Donald Trump was vowing no ceasefire.

Today he's talking about the possibility of a complete and total end to hostilities.

Things aren't going the way he hoped and expected.

I think that's what is the realization here at the White House.

He urged the people of Iran, if you remember, to rise up, but there hasn't been regime change.

Iran continues to be able to retaliate, even though it's significantly damaged,

and it's drawn those o-other Arab Gulf nations into this conflict, something that Donald Trump himself said had surprised him.

And of course, then you get to the Strait of Hormuz, which has delivered this huge energy shock, price shock, to the whole world, not least to American consumers, with a dollar on the gallon of petrol here.

Rita, many American presidents before Donald Trump have realized this, and perhaps he's realizing this too.

These wars are easy to start, but they can be very hard to finish.

Garry O'Donohue in Washington, while Jeremy Bowen, our international editor, is here.

And Jeremy, what on earth are we to make of these claims and counterclaims about US-Iran talks?

Yeah, two versions of the truth, perhaps.

One coming from Tehran, one coming from Washington, D.C.

Don't forget, during previous rounds of negotiations, the Americans and Israelis attacked Iran not once, but

twice, including on the 28th of February this year.

Look, if they if there were talks, the agenda would have to be massive and complicated.

What about the enriched uranium that could be used to make a nuclear weapon?

What about the alliances Iran has around the region, like Hezbollah in, in Lebanon?

And what about the Strait of Hormuz, the most potent weapon that Iran seems to have discovered, in fact, knew about all along?

And people plenty of people ask, why didn't President Trump know about it?

Um, the Iranians, if it is that kind of real negotiation at some point, will make their own demands.

They'll want to retain control in some way of the Strait of Hormuz, maybe lift sanctions, maybe get some assurance that the Israelis are not going to attack them.

So I think that what we're seeing right now is, is it perhaps Trump preparing a declaration of victory?

Gulf states don't want to be left with a, a mess in the region.

Or is it be is it simply an attempt to reassure the markets?

That seems to be one of the most credible things, to try to s he just grabbed at something to try to reassure them.

The point is, though, in victory for to have victory in war, you need a defined objective, you need a clear exit strategy, you need a plan for what's coming next.

And the evidence is that he had none of those things, whereas Iran has had this plan to make this into a war of attrition.

And what President Trump has done has dismissed all those, uh, worries and doubts that previous American presidents have had about, about attacking Iran because of all the difficulties it would cause.

And I think he's discovering that that's why they chose not to destroy the Islamic Republic,

Jeremy Bowen there, our international editor.

Whilst Sir Keir Starmer has told MPs that Britain must be prepared for the war to continue for some time,

and that people shouldn't fall into the false comfort of thinking there would be a quick and early end to this, the Prime Minister also insisted the UK would not be dragged into the war.

Downing Street said the Chancellor will tomorrow set out steps to crack down on companies seeking to raise prices and profit from the war.

Here's our political editor, Chris Mason.

Week four of this war, and the implications, consequences, questions tumble towards us, tumble towards the Prime Minister.

Prices at the pumps now, the potential for costs to spiral in the future.

The key question: how long is this all going to go on?

Do you think that households and businesses in our country should be planning for a disruption that actually lasts for months, or do you think that actually this can be concluded in days and weeks, as President Trump seems to suggest?

Hard to answer that question if I'm, um, uh, honest about it.

But we've got to plan on the basis, uh, that it could go on for some time.

And what about government help with bills, given how expensive universal support was after Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine?

Are you considering targeted support this time rather than the universal offer given just how expensive it was last time?

I'm acutely aware of how much it cost last time round, um,

and I'm acutely aware of the state of the public finances.

We are looking at what support we can put in.

And as soon as we're able to answer the question what exactly that looks like, we will make it clear.

The British warship HMS Dragon has now arrived in the Mediterranean, with critics saying it's embarrassing more kit wasn't sent to the region sooner.