From a panic attack to TACO—Trump's 12 hours that shocked the world

Eastern Time, April 7, 2026, Tuesday, 8:06 a.m.

Trump issued a brief post on the social media platform Truth Social: “Tonight, all of civilization will end and can never be rebuilt.” He set Iran a last deadline: by 8 p.m. that night, either the deal is made or there are consequences.

The post immediately triggered a chain reaction worldwide—from ordinary residents in Tehran, to the trading floors of Wall Street, to emergency phone conferences among European diplomats. This was the most dramatic act of maximum-pressure escalation since Trump took office. In addition, a commentary by The New York Times pointed out that Trump’s astonishing threat to “wipe out Iran’s civilization,” with his customary casual cruelty, has become his preferred mode of communication. Even though it includes what international law might define as war crimes, such extreme remarks were posted casually on Truth Social, alongside ads for bullet-shaped pens, patriotic hats, and a dinner at the Mar-a-Lago estate.

And less than 90 minutes before his own self-imposed cutoff time, Trump posted again, announcing that he had agreed to suspend the bombing campaign against Iran for two weeks. According to Xinhua News Agency, that night Trump wrote on social media: "I agree to suspend the bombing and attacks on Iran for two weeks.

From ‘all of civilization will end’ to ‘suspend for two weeks’—only ten hours and twenty-six minutes separated the two statements.

However, this brief U.S.-Iran ceasefire isn’t so much crisis resolved as a temporary shelving of deeper contradictions. If both sides cannot reach an agreement, two weeks from now Washington and Tehran may once again teeter on the edge of confrontation. Media analysis said that the fundamental issues between the U.S. and Iran that have hung unresolved for years remain; one of the core sticking points is Iran’s continually growing stockpile of enriched uranium in its nuclear program.

One post—the world holds its breath

When Trump’s post appeared on screens, reactions around the world began at nearly the same time.

In Iran, many residents started preparing for power outages and gas shortages. According to The Wall Street Journal, some people dug out old-style camping stoves and refilled the fuel tanks.

Less than 30 minutes after the post went out, the outlet cited information from Arab country officials, saying Iranian officials told Egypt that Tehran had cut off direct contact with U.S. negotiation representatives. Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps also issued a warning: if the United States crossed the “red line,” Iran would “no longer hold back,” and would list Saudi Aramco, the Yanbu oil facilities, and the United Arab Emirates’ Fujairah oil pipeline as potential strike targets.

When former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert read the message, Israeli air-raid alerts were sounding. He went into his home air-raid shelter and, amid the sirens, stated: “I’m inclined not to take President Trump’s statement literally. I hope he means to destroy a regime, not to destroy Iran’s civilization.”

At the same time, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Time, U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Dan Caine, joined a daily video call with U.S. Central Command commander, Lieutenant General Brad Cooper. It was reported that** military planners had already been preparing potential strike options against Iran’s energy infrastructure and pulled up a target list that had already been reviewed and approved by military lawyers.**

But the actual scope of that target list was far smaller than the “every power plant in Iran will burn and explode” described in Trump’s post. It is understood that each target must meet legality requirements: it has a clear link to Iran’s military and security forces and does not cause excessive harm to civilians. The report said that night U.S. forces carried out strikes on more than 50 targets near Kharg Island in the Strait of Hormuz, but did not bomb oil infrastructure.

Pentagon spokesperson Sean Parnell said: “The entire Department of Defense will carry out the president’s orders and will firmly execute his military objectives.”

Wall Street: one eye on the screen, the other on Truth Social

For the markets, the day had a special tempo—it was not driven by battlefield news like a traditional geopolitical conflict, but instead followed almost entirely, with every swing of Trump’s social media posts.

According to a rundown of Wall Street’s view: over the past 12 hours, the market reacted sharply to each statement, tweet, or media report:

In U.S. stock trading before the open, with the final deadline set by Trump—7 p.m. Eastern Time, approaching—his threatening rhetoric at one point pushed oil prices up more than 3%.

In early U.S. stock trading, reports said Iran was no longer communicating directly with the U.S. Then in Tuesday’s early session, the market’s declines widened: the Nasdaq 100’s drop expanded to 1.5%, and crude oil moved higher further.

In the U.S. stock midday session, U.S. media, citing sources, said that in the past 24 hours, negotiations between the U.S. and Iran had made some progress, and oil prices then fell again.

In the U.S. stock close session, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz said he requested Trump to delay the deadline by two weeks. The declines in the three major U.S. stock indexes narrowed again, and the S&P and Nasdaq narrowly closed higher.

After the close of U.S. stock trading, Trump extended the deadline for Iran talks, saying Iran agreed to open the Strait of Hormuz. The WTI crude futures decline widened, and the gains in S&P stock index futures and Dow Jones futures expanded to 1.7%.

Describing the feeling, Peter Boockvar, chief investment officer at OnePoint BFG Wealth Partners, said: “It’s dizzying. One eye is on the market screen, and the other eye is on Trump’s Truth Social page.”

During this period, Citigroup also activated something like an emergency protocol during a presidential election, pausing operations such as fine-grained code updates to trading tools that might slow system operations.

Technical investors and corporate executives’ communication group chats also erupted quickly after Trump posted. Even while on vacation, Bryan Lanza, a former Trump adviser and current corporate adviser, continued receiving a large number of inquiries from clients in the energy and financial sectors. He urged everyone to stay calm and believed Trump would not actually carry out the threats.

Overall, Wall Street consensus was similar to multiple previous Trump-style deadlines: treat them as leverage in negotiations, not a prelude to real action.

Supporters waver, allies speak out—rarely

Pressure came not only from the markets, but also from within Trump’s political circle.

According to reports, officials inside the White House were privately uneasy about the president’s post, believing that his excessive attention to foreign affairs was distracting from domestic issues—issues that are key to winning public support.

On social media, Tim Pool, a media personality with more than 2 million followers, said in an interview: “He’s trying to look threatening and crazy.” He warned that if Trump doesn’t deliver, “we’ll see the emperor without clothes… this will be his last bet.”

Criticism from European allies was even more direct. French Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said publicly: “A civilization cannot be erased.” One of Trump’s closest European allies, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, also rarely spoke out to criticize: “It’s essential to clearly distinguish a regime’s responsibility from the fate of millions of ordinary citizens. Iranian civilians cannot—and should not—pay for their leaders’ crimes.”

Pope Leo and actor Ben Stiller also called for an end to escalation through their respective public channels.

Pakistan offers a ‘step,’ Trump takes it

A diplomatic twist came in the afternoon.

According to The Wall Street Journal, just after 3 p.m. local time on April 7, Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif publicly called on Trump to extend the deadline by two weeks, pushing for a U.S.-Iran ceasefire, and also urged Tehran to reopen the Strait of Hormuz during the same period as a show of goodwill. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt immediately responded: “The president has been made aware of the proposal and will respond.”

Trump then told Fox News that the U.S. was in “intense negotiations.”

Throughout the afternoon, Trump and senior aides huddled in closed-door discussions in the Oval Office, weighing the pros and cons of each side.

According to Xinhua News Agency, at 6:32 p.m. Eastern Time that evening, Trump posted on Truth Social, announcing a pause to the planned strike operations: “On the condition that the Islamic Republic of Iran agrees to fully, immediately, and safely open the Strait of Hormuz, I agree to suspend the bombing and attack operations against Iran for two weeks.”

According to a综合 report by Xinhua News Agency, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council subsequently issued a statement confirming that it would conduct two weeks of political talks with the United States in Islamabad, Pakistan, while also indicating that Iran holds “complete lack of trust” toward the U.S. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz confirmed that both sides agreed to cease fire immediately at all locations starting immediately, and invited delegations from both U.S. and Iranian sides to travel to Islamabad on April 10 for further negotiations.

After the ceasefire: the fundamental issues remain unresolved

A ceasefire achieved doesn’t mean the differences are bridged; the truly thorny part is hidden in the negotiation terms.

According to Xinhua News Agency, Iran’s Supreme National Security Council released the ten-point ceasefire terms delivered to the U.S. via Pakistan. The core content includes:

• The Strait of Hormuz must achieve “controlled passage” in coordination with Iran’s armed forces, with Iran holding the leading role;

• U.S. combat forces withdraw comprehensively from all bases and deployment points in the region;

• Lift all first- and second-tier sanctions against Iran, and rescind the relevant resolutions of the United Nations Security Council and the International Atomic Energy Agency;

• Unfreeze all frozen overseas Iranian assets;

• Recognize Iran’s uranium enrichment rights;

• Fully compensate Iran for war losses based on the assessment results;

• End the war against all members of the “Axis of Resistance” and end Israel’s military actions.

According to CCTV News, an anonymous regional official also disclosed that the ceasefire plan includes allowing Iran and Oman to collect tolls on ships passing through the Strait of Hormuz, and Iran will use this money for post-war reconstruction. This will be the first time tolls are levied in the history of this international waterway.

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi issued a statement announcing that the Strait of Hormuz would achieve secure navigation within two weeks, but did not give a specific date for restoration. In the statement, he emphasized that the passage would be conducted under the control of Iran’s “armed forces.”

In response, Richard Fontaine, CEO of the Center for a New American Security, told The New York Times: “Iran is still controlling the Strait of Hormuz, and it wasn’t the case before the war. I find it difficult to believe that the United States and the international community can accept indefinitely Iran controlling this critical energy chokepoint. This would be a worse outcome than before the war.”

Fontaine also pointed out that the ten-point plan submitted by Iran “reads like Iran’s pre-war wish list,” and that Trump agreed on the evening of April 7 to use it as a basis for negotiations—despite just weeks earlier, he was still demanding that Iran “unconditionally surrender.”

Trump’s extreme rhetoric triggered criticism: the world increasingly sees the U.S. as “unstable and dangerous”

The New York Times commentary said that Trump’s astonishing threat to “destroy Iran’s civilization,” with his customary casual cruelty, has become his preferred style of communication. Such extreme remarks—even including war crimes that international law may define—were posted casually on Truth Social, alongside ads for bullet-shaped pens, patriotic hats, and a dinner at the Mar-a-Lago estate.

In the view of the president and his supporters, this is all part of Trump’s chaotic negotiating style—aimed at pushing him to end the conflict he staged himself, and persuading Tehran to open the strait. Some presidential advisers even believe Trump’s escalating rhetoric is a negotiating tactic, showing that he is more inclined to find a way out of the war than to actually launch destructive attacks.

However, this “impulsive and unpredictable” leadership style is now facing unprecedented scrutiny. Alex Wellerstein, a historian of nuclear conflict, said that even if the threats ultimately aren’t carried out, such violent rhetoric harms the U.S.’s credibility as a negotiator and its international standing, making the world increasingly see the U.S. as ‘unstable and dangerous,’ not ‘a reliable partner.’

Criticism inside the U.S. has also surged. Right-wing podcast host Tucker Carlson said the president’s Easter message “sabotaged Christianity’s most sacred day” and that “it is disgusting at every level.” He said bluntly that this use of U.S. military power to destroy a country’s civilian infrastructure—“war crimes, a moral crime against that country’s people.”

Joe Kent, former director of the National Counterterrorism Center, also posted on X: “Trump thinks he’s threatening Iran to destroy itself, but the U.S. is now in danger. If he tries to eradicate Iran’s civilization, the U.S. will no longer be viewed as a stabilizing force for the world—it will be seen as a maker of chaos. That would effectively end our position as a superpower.” Even some Republican members of Congress, such as Wisconsin Senator Ron Johnson, said they “hope and pray that President Trump is only bluffing.”

Although Trump previously had similar “scripts”—achieving some kind of agreement through escalating threats and declaring victory—his increasingly violent rhetoric reveals a sense of frustration: he hasn’t been able to achieve his goal through the previously postponed deadline for bombing infrastructure.

Risk warning and disclaimer

        There are risks in the market; investment is for caution. This article does not constitute personal investment advice, and it does not take into account any specific investment objectives, financial situations, or needs of individual users. Users should consider whether any opinions, viewpoints, or conclusions in this article align with their specific circumstances. Any investment made on this basis is at your own risk. Responsibility rests with the investor.