A senior Iranian military official warned Saturday that a “renewed conflict” with the United States is “likely” after President Donald Trump said he is “not satisfied” with Tehran’s latest proposal and signaled military options remain on the table, saying he “can’t imagine” the offer would be acceptable given Iran has “not yet paid a big enough price” for its actions over the past 47 years.

Speaking to reporters before departing West Palm Beach, Florida, President Trump said he would review the proposal after being briefed only on the “concept of the deal,” noting, “They’re going to give me the exact wording now… I’ll let you know about it later.” Moments later, he underscored his skepticism in a Truth Social post, writing he “can’t imagine” the proposal would be acceptable in that Iran has “not yet paid a big enough price for what they have done to Humanity, and the World, over the last 47 years.”

President Trump’s reference to Iran’s “47 years” points to the Islamic Republic’s decades-long record as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism — directing and arming a vast proxy network across the Middle East while targeting U.S. personnel and interests, killing and maiming hundreds of American service members over the years.

The remarks followed President Trump’s outright rejection Friday of the same proposal — conveyed via Pakistani intermediaries — making clear he is “not satisfied” with the terms Tehran is demanding and warning there “may never be a deal.” He said Iran continues to push conditions the United States “can’t agree to,” even as it attempts to re-engage diplomatically under mounting economic and military pressure.

President Trump pointed to deep internal fractures within Iran’s leadership as a central obstacle, describing a regime struggling to function coherently after sustained U.S.-Israeli strikes degraded its command structure.

“There’s tremendous discord… the leadership is very disjointed — two, three, maybe four groups… they all want to make a deal, but they’re all messed up,” he said.

In those same Friday remarks at the White House, President Trump also made clear he is weighing both diplomatic and military options following a briefing from U.S. Central Command on potential strike scenarios.

“Do we want to go and just blast the hell out of them and finish them forever — or do we want to try to make a deal?” he said, adding he would prefer to avoid escalation “on a human basis,” while confirming military action remains a viable option.

Asked again Saturday whether or not strikes could resume, President Trump declined to outline specific triggers but made clear the option remains firmly on the table, stating, “If they misbehave, if they do something bad… it’s a possibility that could happen, certainly.”

Iran’s response was immediate. Mohammad Jafar Asadi, a senior commander within Iran’s military apparatus, said Saturday that “a renewed conflict between Iran and the United States is likely,” claiming “evidence has shown that the United States is not committed to any promises or agreements.” He added Iran’s armed forces are “fully prepared for any new adventures or foolishness from the Americans.”

Iran’s deputy foreign minister Kazem Gharibabadi echoed the regime’s position, telling foreign diplomats in Tehran that “the ball is in the United States’ court,” while insisting Iran is “prepared for both paths” — even as its proposal demands sweeping concessions from Washington.

Details of the proposal — described by Iranian state-linked outlets as a 14-point framework — underscore how far apart the two sides remain. The plan demands sweeping concessions from Washington, including U.S. security guarantees, the withdrawal of American forces from the region, an end to the naval blockade, sanctions relief, the release of frozen assets, and compensation payments, along with an end to fighting “on all fronts,” including Lebanon — terms widely viewed as non-starters.

The proposal also calls for a new mechanism governing the Strait of Hormuz — a move that would effectively grant Tehran expanded control over one of the world’s most critical energy chokepoints — while compressing negotiations into a 30-day timeline and deferring any meaningful discussion of its nuclear program.

Beyond those demands, the proposal’s sequencing presents another major obstacle. President Trump has repeatedly made clear there will be no agreement that fails to directly address Iran’s nuclear program, warning there will be “no deal” unless Tehran agrees it will never obtain a nuclear weapon.

Tehran, by contrast, continues to push nuclear negotiations to a later stage while seeking immediate economic relief — an approach U.S. officials view as an attempt to secure upfront concessions while delaying resolution of the core issue.

President Trump also signaled Saturday that, should military action resume, the United States would seek to eliminate what remains of Iran’s missile capabilities after previous strikes destroyed the bulk of its infrastructure.

“I’d like to eliminate it… it’d be a start for them to build up again,” he said, warning against allowing the regime to retain the ability to quickly reconstitute its military strength.

Even as talks continue, the United States is maintaining and reinforcing its force posture across the region. Two days after briefing President Trump on military options, U.S. Central Command chief Adm. Brad Cooper arrived in theater and met with forces aboard the USS Tripoli in the Arabian Sea — near the Strait of Hormuz, where the U.S. naval blockade is actively being enforced.

The blockade remains a central pressure point on Tehran. U.S. enforcement actions have turned away dozens of vessels and severely disrupted Iran’s oil exports, with Pentagon estimates indicating the regime has lost roughly $4.8 billion in revenue. More than 30 tankers carrying tens of millions of barrels of oil are now stranded, underscoring the mounting economic strain.

At the same time, Iranian officials are openly signaling an intent to assert control over the strategic waterway. Ali Nikzad, deputy speaker of Iran’s parliament, said Tehran would not “relinquish our rights in the Strait of Hormuz” and warned that shipping “will not be the same as before.”

Another senior lawmaker, Mohammadreza Rezaei, went further, declaring, “Managing the Strait of Hormuz is more important than acquiring nuclear weapons” — underscoring just how central Tehran views control of the chokepoint, through which a significant share of the world’s energy supply passes, as a tool for economic leverage and geopolitical pressure.

As Washington continues pursuing a diplomatic resolution while maintaining maximum pressure on the regime — including through its naval blockade and broader economic constraints — Tehran’s sweeping demands and escalating rhetoric have further cast doubt on the viability of any agreement. With U.S. forces already positioned and Iran signaling readiness for confrontation, the prospect of renewed conflict is increasingly coming into focus as negotiations appear unlikely to produce terms acceptable to the United States.