Lead: At the close of a G7 foreign ministers meeting in France, Senator Marco Rubio said the United States expects to conclude its operations related to Iran “in the next couple of weeks,” asserting that objectives were being met and that the campaign was ahead of schedule. He spoke as allied ministers and the EU foreign policy chief gathered to address the wider crisis sparked after the US and Israel began military action on 28 February. Rubio and other US officials said Washington is sending forces to the region to preserve presidential options while diplomacy continues. The comments came amid reports of Iranian messages about talks and conflicting accounts over who in Tehran could speak for the government.
Key takeaways
- Senator Marco Rubio told reporters after the G7 meeting in France that US operations against Iran were on track and expected to finish “in the next couple of weeks,” a timeline that aligns with earlier US estimates of a four-to-seven week campaign.
- The current confrontation began on 28 February when the US and Israel launched strikes; several senior Iranian figures have since been killed, complicating who might negotiate for Tehran.
- The White House has reportedly offered a 15-point plan to Iran via Pakistan; US officials say they have received messages but not a formal, clarified response.
- President Trump said he paused a threatened strike on Iranian power plants to allow talks a chance, while his special envoy Steve Witkoff said he was “hopeful” meetings would occur this week.
- Iran announced attacks on nuclear facilities and two major steel plants, and the IRGC threatened retaliation against industrial infrastructure linked to the US or Israel.
- Tehran has closed the Strait of Hormuz in retaliation and reportedly discussed charging fees for passage; roughly 20% of global oil and liquefied natural gas normally transits the strait.
- The G7 communique urged an immediate end to attacks on civilians and civilian infrastructure and stressed the need to permanently restore safe, toll-free navigation through the Strait of Hormuz.
- Most G7 members (except Japan) are NATO allies; they have not acceded to the US request to escort commercial vessels through the strait, preferring a diplomatic end to the conflict.
Background
The current series of military strikes and reprisals escalated after coordinated US and Israeli action began on 28 February. That campaign reportedly targeted senior Iranian commanders and infrastructure tied to Tehran’s military capabilities; those losses have raised questions about who now speaks for Iran in any negotiations. The United States administration has repeatedly framed its actions as time-limited, with officials citing a four-to-seven week window for major operations.
Energy security quickly became central because roughly one-fifth of the world’s oil and liquefied natural gas passes through the Strait of Hormuz. Iran’s decision to close the waterway, and reports that the IRGC has been charging fees for passage, turned a regional military confrontation into a global economic concern. NATO and many Western partners have emphasized that restoring safe commercial transit is a priority but have stopped short of joining US calls for naval escort missions.
Main event
At the G7 foreign ministers meeting in France, Rubio described the US campaign as achieving its objectives ahead of schedule and reiterated that Washington was deploying additional troops to give President Trump more options. He said messages had been exchanged with elements of Iran’s system indicating a willingness to discuss certain topics, but added it remained unclear who could legitimately represent Tehran. That uncertainty follows the reported elimination of several senior figures since 28 February.
Trump has been publicly reported to have sent a 15-point peace outline to Iran via Pakistan; US officials said they were awaiting a formal answer. When asked whether Iran would respond by Friday, Rubio said the administration had received messages but not a clear, confirmatory response. Trump also told reporters he had delayed a planned strike on Iranian power plants to allow diplomacy to proceed.
Iran, for its part, accused Israel of striking its nuclear-related sites and two large steel plants, prompting Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi to warn of a “heavy price”. The IRGC stated it would retaliate by targeting industrial infrastructure tied to the US or Israel. Tehran has also used drones and missiles against Israel and Gulf states hosting US military facilities and has struck civilian targets including airports, residential buildings and energy installations.
Analysis & implications
The US timeline — Rubio’s “couple of weeks” and the administration’s broader four-to-seven week projection — is politically useful for Washington: a shorter campaign limits domestic and allied war-weariness and frames military action as precise and time-bound. But timelines are provisional; battlefield dynamics, Iran’s capacity to retaliate, and the fragmentation of its command after high-profile losses make predictions uncertain. If Iran’s leadership is contested or dispersed, finding credible interlocutors for talks may be slow and messy.
Energy markets are the most immediate global exposure. A prolonged or repeated closure of the Strait of Hormuz risks sustained spikes in oil and LNG prices, which can feed inflation and slow growth worldwide. Even temporary disruptions have already pushed prices higher; extended blockage could prompt emergency responses, including strategic petroleum releases or redirected shipping, which carry costs and delays.
Diplomatically, the G7 split over escort missions illustrates limits of allied military coordination: most members favor ending the conflict to secure passage rather than direct naval guarantees. The UK said it was leading coalition work to ensure the strait remained open after hostilities, signaling allied interest in a post-conflict security architecture. Economically vulnerable states reliant on Gulf energy exports or imports face greater harm than the US, a point Rubio underscored when urging coalition-building.
Comparison & data
| Metric | Value | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Start of major US/Israel operations | 28 February | BBC/Reuters (reported) |
| US administration projected campaign length | 4–7 weeks | Statements by Trump and senior officials |
| Rubio’s latest projection | “Next couple of weeks” | G7 meeting remarks |
| Share of global oil/LNG via Hormuz | ~20% | Energy statistics (globally reported) |
The table frames the timeline debate: official US projections (4–7 weeks) sit alongside Rubio’s narrower forecast. The conflict’s energy impact is quantifiable in Hormuz transit volumes; because roughly 20% of key commodities flow there, even short disruptions reverberate through markets. Analysts will watch whether the next days produce a formal Iranian answer to the reported 15-point plan and whether military operations wind down as US officials expect.
Reactions & quotes
Officials and analysts offered guarded responses after the G7 meeting.
“We expect to finish our operations in the next couple of weeks; objectives are being achieved and we are ahead of schedule.”
Senator Marco Rubio (remarks after G7 meeting)
Rubio framed the timeline as evidence of progress and used it to justify continued deployments meant to give the US president strategic options. His comment also served to reassure allies worried about a prolonged campaign.
“I paused the threatened attack on power plants to give talks a chance. Iran is being decimated. We are talking now.”
President Donald Trump (press remarks)
Trump’s statement signaled a mix of pressure and openness to negotiations. By publicly delaying strikes on civilian infrastructure, the administration aimed to keep diplomatic channels viable while maintaining leverage.
“We have a 15-point deal on the table… we expect an answer from them and it would solve it all. I’m hopeful there will be meetings this week.”
Steve Witkoff (Trump special envoy)
Witkoff reiterated that Washington believes a negotiated package could end the confrontation quickly if Tehran responds to the proposal and designates credible representatives for talks.
Unconfirmed
- Reports that Iran formally accepted or will imminently accept the US 15-point plan remain unconfirmed; US officials say only that messages have been exchanged.
- Claims that Israel struck Iranian nuclear facilities and two large steel plants are disputed and require independent verification beyond Iranian statements.
- Accounts that the IRGC is systematically charging fees to all vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz have been reported but are not yet corroborated by comprehensive commercial shipping records.
Bottom line
The United States says its campaign is on track and expects operations linked to Iran to wind down within weeks, a position intended to reassure allies and domestic audiences that the conflict will be limited in time. Energy markets, however, remain vulnerable: the Strait of Hormuz’s partial closure and attacks on regional infrastructure have already driven prices higher and could cause lasting economic pain if disruptions continue.
Diplomacy is the critical near-term variable. If Tehran clarifies who can negotiate and accepts a credible package, a rapid de-escalation is possible. If not, uncertainty about representation, the IRGC’s posture, and the potential for further strikes leave the situation poised between quick resolution and a more protracted, costly confrontation.