CAIRO, April 8 (Xinhua) -- A two-week ceasefire between the United States and Iran has paused hostilities, but analysts warn it has not built the trust needed to prevent conflict from resuming, given decades of rivalry between the two countries.

SHARP WORDS DESPITE TRUCE

Washington and Tehran exchanged pointed remarks on Wednesday even as the truce held.

U.S. President Donald Trump told Sky News the deal "is good," but warned that military action could resume quickly if it fails.

Iranian military advisor Mohsen Rezaee wrote on social media that Tehran's armed forces "remain on the trigger until complete assurance of safeguarding national interests is achieved."

International reaction was cautiously positive. Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi said serious negotiations were now required for lasting peace. "For now, the world has stepped back from disaster," he wrote on social media.

Markets responded sharply to the truce: crude oil prices fell while stocks rose. Analysts, however, urged caution.

Charu Chanana, chief investment strategist at Saxo Bank, said the truce remained only a pause. "The real test is whether strikes truly end, negotiations progress, Hormuz remains open, and Israel aligns with de-escalation," she said.

Shipping company Maersk said the ceasefire may create transit opportunities but cautioned it did not yet provide full maritime certainty.

WIDE GAPS REMAIN

Trump announced on social media that Washington had received a 10-point proposal from Tehran, calling it "a workable basis on which to negotiate" and saying the two-week window would allow a final agreement to be reached.

Iran's semi-official Mehr News Agency reported the proposal includes a U.S. commitment to halt further acts of aggression, continued Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz, recognition of Iran's right to nuclear enrichment, and the lifting of sanctions.

Iran's negotiating team is expected to begin talks with a U.S. delegation led by Vice President JD Vance in Islamabad, Pakistan on Friday.

Palestinian analyst Ahmed Rafiq Awad said both sides had strong incentives to reach an agreement. "Washington seeks reassurance for its public, the oil market, and the midterm elections," he said. "Iran wants to avoid military and economic damage. If we set aside Israeli actions, a settlement is very possible."

However, some analysts warned that major disagreements persist despite the diplomatic shift.

"The current agreement is meant to contain escalation, not resolve the underlying conflict," said Palestinian analyst Akram Atallah. "It opens a diplomatic window, but structural issues remain."

The core disputes center on Iran's nuclear program, economic sanctions, and regional influence.

Washington regards Iran's nuclear ambitions as a major security threat; Tehran insists it does not seek nuclear weapons and enrichment is a sovereign right. Iran is seeking substantial sanctions relief, while the United States prefers to retain economic leverage. Washington has long sought to curb Iranian influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen, while Tehran views its regional role as essential for deterrence.

"The disagreements are rooted in decades of political, ideological, and strategic rivalry," Atallah said. "Deep mistrust means any agreement will likely remain fragile."

Israel's position adds a further layer of uncertainty. The country may continue to influence the course of U.S.-Iran negotiations. The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that four Israel-related issues remain unresolved, including questions over Iran's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.■