A US White House Official says that "the Iranians want to make a deal with us, but their positions are always late and fall short of what is required", Al Jazeera reports

Rhetoric of this kind, framing the counterparty as willing but inadequate, is a familiar stage in US-Iran negotiating cycles and has historically served to position blame ahead of either escalation or a resumed round, rather than to signal an imminent breakthrough. The distinction that has mattered for crude is between talks that are stalled and talks that are collapsing: the former tends to leave the geopolitical risk premium in place, the latter has on previous occasions reintroduced supply-disruption pricing through the prompt spread and freight and insurance costs in the Gulf, while genuine progress toward a deal has instead weighed on prices via the prospect of returning Iranian barrels. Sourcing through a regional outlet attributed to an unnamed official is typical of trial-balloon signalling in this channel and carries less weight than a named, on-record statement. Worth noting is that 'want to make a deal' language from the US side has in past episodes preceded both renewed talks and tighter sanctions enforcement, so the statement itself is ambiguous on direction. The tells are the follow-ons: any movement on sanctions waivers or enforcement, changes in Iranian export volumes, and whether mediators announce a further round.