President Donald Trump said the ceasefire with Iran is on “massive life support,” as retired U.S. commanders and national security experts are increasingly split whether Washington should resume military operations against Tehran or avoid what critics warn could become another prolonged Middle East conflict.

“I would say the ceasefire is on massive life support,” Trump told reporters Monday. “Where the doctor walks in and says, ‘Sir, your loved one has approximately a 1% chance of living.’”

Trump also dismissed Iran’s latest response to a proposed agreement as “a piece of garbage,” amid reports the White House is reviewing military options should negotiations collapse.

Retired Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, former national security adviser under Trump, said he believes Iran’s leadership is unlikely to make the concessions Trump considers necessary for a deal.

WHITE HOUSE WARNS IRAN AGAINST BALKING AT DEAL: TRUMP READY TO ‘UNLEASH HELL’

“I think the Iranian leadership and IRGC are unwilling to make the kind of concessions that President Trump thinks are at the minimum,” McMaster told Fox News Digital, referring to Iran’s hardline Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. 

“President Trump always wants a deal,” he added. “But he’s not going to sign up for a bad deal.”

The emerging debate now centers on a core question facing Washington: whether additional military pressure could force Iran to abandon its nuclear and missile ambitions, or whether renewed strikes would deepen a regional conflict without producing decisive results.

Retired Vice Adm. Mark Fox, former deputy commander of U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM), said he believes the current ceasefire and diplomatic track are unlikely to force Iran to back down.

“I really cannot envision anything other than a full return to combat operations,” Fox told Fox News Digital. “The only thing that they will respond to, I think ultimately, is force.”

Fox argued the U.S. military remains capable of reopening and securing commercial shipping through the Strait of Hormuz despite ongoing Iranian threats against vessels transiting the waterway.

HORMUZ CHOKE POINT PERSISTS AS IRAN HALTS OIL TRAFFIC DESPITE TRUMP CEASEFIRE

“This is a militarily obtainable objective,” he said, outlining a strategy involving guided missile destroyers, attack helicopters, drones and expanded aerial surveillance to create a protected maritime corridor through the Strait.

Fox acknowledged the U.S. Navy is smaller than it was during the 1980s tanker wars, but argued American forces still possess the capability to secure the chokepoint if Washington commits enough naval assets and persistent monitoring operations.

“It’s not easy,” Fox said. “But the geography is fixed.”

He described a possible strategy that would rely on destroyers, drones and attack aircraft to create what he called an “unblinking eye” over the strait, allowing U.S. forces to identify and neutralize Iranian speedboats, drones and anti-shipping threats before they can strike commercial vessels.

Fox also warned against allowing Iran to preserve leverage over Hormuz while continuing to advance its missile and nuclear programs.

“If not now, when?” he said. “If they had a nuclear weapon, they would use it.”

EXPERTS WARN IRAN’S NUCLEAR DOUBLE-TALK DESIGNED TO BUY TIME, UNDERMINE US PRESSURE

Fox, who also signed onto a recent policy paper by the Jewish Institute for National Security of America, echoed the report’s argument that Iran is using negotiations to buy time while preserving its military capabilities.

The paper was authored by several retired senior U.S. military officials and national security experts, including retired Gen. Chuck Wald, former deputy commander of U.S. European Command and retired Vice Adm. Robert Harward, former deputy commander of CENTCOM, argued the current ceasefire and diplomatic track “cannot reliably compel Iran” to meet U.S. demands and warned Tehran was seeking to “drag out talks, erode U.S. resolve, and use the time to strengthen itself.”

The report called for expanded military operations targeting Iran’s maritime capabilities, missile infrastructure and internal coercive apparatus while avoiding broad attacks on civilian infrastructure that could trigger wider regional escalation.

But not everyone agrees that renewed military action would produce a better outcome.

Retired Lt. Col. Daniel Davis, a senior fellow at Defense Priorities and longtime critic of expanded U.S. military interventions, warned that calls to “finish the job” ignore the realities exposed during the recent fighting.

“To ‘finish the job,’ as they say, is irrational,” Davis told Fox News Digital. “It’s illogical, and it violates any kind of military principle.”

KEITH KELLOGG URGES US TO ‘FINISH THE JOB’ AGAINST IRAN BY SEIZING ISLANDS, STRANGLING ECONOMY

Davis argued that despite thousands of strikes and weeks of fighting, Iran retained significant missile and maritime capabilities.

“We couldn’t knock them out with 14,000 targets hit,” he said. “Why does anybody think that going back another time is going to have a different result?”

He described Iran’s geography, dispersed missile infrastructure and asymmetric naval tactics as creating what he called “a militarily unsolvable problem.”

“The only thing left is a diplomatic outcome,” Davis said.

The disagreement reflects a broader divide emerging in Washington as officials weigh what comes next if negotiations fail.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Supporters of renewed military action argue Iran is weaker than it has been in decades and that stopping now risks allowing Tehran to regroup, rebuild its missile arsenal and preserve leverage over one of the world’s most important energy choke points.

Critics counter that even extensive U.S. and Israeli strikes failed to fundamentally break the regime’s control or eliminate its military capabilities, raising the risk that further escalation could drag the United States into another drawn-out regional conflict with uncertain results.

Still, even as formal talks on A.I. have stalled, scholars from both countries have held informal discussions, often through academic conferences or think tanks. Participants described these meetings as vibrant, and said they have produced many suggestions for cooperation, such as an emergency hotline in case of an A.I.-related accident, or shared standards for testing whether A.I. has the ability to synthesize biohazards.

But these conversations have not been immune from political pressures.

Jiang Tianjiao, a professor at Fudan University in Shanghai who has participated in many discussions with U.S. scholars, said that many Chinese scholars, especially in the security and defense communities, were skeptical of their U.S. counterparts’ intentions. They pointed to Mr. Trump’s efforts to loosen domestic restrictions on A.I. at home as proof that safety discussions were a trap to slow China’s development.

“These people believe the U.S. is talking about one thing but doing the other,” Professor Jiang said, noting that he personally supported continued engagement. In their minds, he said, “China should never trust the United States on any proposals of bilateral A.I. cooperation for all humankind. That’s just some fantasy.”

On the American side, many scholars and officials believe that China is secretly racing toward artificial super-intelligence, though Beijing has made little public mention of it, and Chinese scholars insist that it is not a focus. Beijing has, instead, publicly emphasized practical, real-world applications of A.I.

Then, there are more basic disagreements. For long-running discussions hosted by the Brookings Institution, a Washington-based research institute, and Tsinghua University in Beijing, the participants created a glossary of terms. There was no consensus on the meaning of fundamental terms such as “loss of control” of A.I. systems, said Kyle Chan, a fellow at Brookings.

Pakistan rejected reports Tuesday that it allowed Iranian aircraft to use its airfields amid tensions with the United States—claims suggesting the move could have shielded the planes from potential airstrikes—even as Islamabad positioned itself as a high-profile mediator between the two sides.

According to the report May 11, Tehran was also said to have possibly sent a civilian aircraft to Afghanistan during the conflict. 

Pakistan said Tuesday the CBS report was “misleading and sensationalized. Such speculative narratives appear aimed at undermining ongoing efforts for regional stability and peace,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said in a statement.

“Following the ceasefire and during the initial round of the Islamabad Talks, a number of aircraft from Iran and the United States arrived in Pakistan to facilitate the movement of diplomatic personnel, security teams, and administrative staff associated with the talks process,” the ministry said before clarifying that “some aircraft and support personnel remained temporarily in Pakistan in anticipation of subsequent rounds of engagement.”

JD VANCE RETURNS TO WASHINGTON AFTER 16 HOURS OF IRAN PEACE TALKS COLLAPSE IN PAKISTAN

The alleged Iranian asset movements had also suggested there was an effort by Iran to conceal some of its remaining aerial assets as Pakistan worked behind the scenes to broker a ceasefire between Iran and the United States.

President Donald Trump also confirmed Tuesday he was satisfied with the mediation work carried out by Pakistan, telling reporters ahead of his trip to China that they were “great.”

“I think the Pakistanis have been great. The field marshal and the prime minister of Pakistan have been absolutely great,” Trump clarified.

In April, Pakistan had emerged as a key mediator in efforts to de-escalate tensions between Washington and Tehran amid the Strait of Hormuz crisis and the regional conflict.

Islamabad hosted senior delegations for talks on April 11–12 after helping secure a temporary two-week ceasefire.

IRAN COVERTLY REPOSITIONS STRIKE DRONES AMID RUSSIA DRILLS IN STRAIT OF HORMUZ, EXPERT SAYS

Pakistan’s position was unique, given its geographic proximity to Iran and its longstanding strategic partnership with the United States. 

Mediation efforts were led by Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, Army Chief Gen. Asim Munir and Foreign Minister Ishaq Dar.

Officials told CBS that, days after Trump announced a ceasefire with Iran in early April, Tehran sent multiple aircraft to Pakistan Air Force Base Nur Khan.

Nur Khan Airbase, located near Rawalpindi, is said to be a key installation of the Pakistan Air Force and serves as a major logistical and operational hub. 

Among the aircraft reportedly moved there was an Iranian Air Force RC-130, a reconnaissance and intelligence-gathering variant of the Lockheed C-130 Hercules, the outlet said.

TRUMP ANNOUNCES ‘PROJECT FREEDOM,’ IRAN THREATENS ATTACKS, PAKISTAN ANNOUNCES US RELEASE OF SEIZED CARGO SHIP

Despite initial progress between the U.S. and Iran, talks in Islamabad on April 11 ultimately collapsed. 

However, Pakistani leadership said it felt optimistic. “We are very optimistic that the current momentum will lead to a lasting agreement,” Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif said.

Trump also praised Pakistan’s mediating role again, stating on May 7, “Pakistan has been fantastic. And its leaders have been fantastic—the marshal and the prime minister.”

As part of the next response, Trump also launched “Project Freedom” to guide vessels through the Strait of Hormuz and to help free up shipping.

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Trump’s initiative to help thousands of stranded crew lasted 48 hours, with the president later acknowledging that it was halted “at the request of Pakistan and other countries,” including Saudi Arabia, to avoid jeopardizing ongoing negotiations with Iran.

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C. said Monday that if Pakistan did shelter Iranian aircraft during mediation then it would force a complete reassessment of Pakistan’s role.

“If this reporting is accurate, it would require a complete reevaluation of the role Pakistan is playing as mediator between Iran, the United States and other parties. Given some of the prior statements by Pakistani defense officials towards Israel, I would not be shocked if this were true,” Graham said in a post shared on X.

Fox News Digital has reached out to the Government of Pakistan, The White House and U.S. Central Command for comment.