The night before TACO failure? Trump announces an indefinite ceasefire, Bitcoin trend analysis

On the morning of April 22, Trump said during a phone call on CNBC’s “Squawk Box”: “I don’t want to extend the ceasefire. We don’t have much time left. I expect to start bombing because I think that’s a better entry posture.”

A few hours after this statement, he posted on Truth Social indicating an indefinite extension of the ceasefire until Iran submits a proposal and negotiations end in some way.

And Trump’s “step” this time was: requests from the Pakistani Army Chief and Prime Minister. He also added that this decision was related to the “serious division within the Iranian government.”

Those familiar with Trump know this is his typical TACO move.

BlockBeats Commentary: TACO is an abbreviation for “Trump Always Chickens Out,” meaning Trump always backs down. The term was first coined by Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong last year and later widely used by traders to describe Trump’s pattern of issuing extreme threats followed by policy reversals.

How this ceasefire was extended

It appears this wasn’t an active diplomatic victory but a passive decision made when no better options were available before the deadline.

This all traces back to the Islamabad negotiations on April 11.

At that time, Vice President Vance led a U.S. delegation to Pakistan for talks with Iran that lasted 21 hours. This was the highest-level direct U.S.-Iran dialogue since the Islamic Revolution in 1979. Vance declared upon departure that Iran “refused to accept U.S. conditions.” The core U.S. demand was a clear commitment from Iran: not only to refrain from developing nuclear weapons but also to commit not to retain any technology capable of quickly enabling nuclear armament. Iran did not agree to this. Iran’s chief negotiator and parliamentary speaker Kalibaf said the U.S. must first decide “whether they can earn our trust.”

On April 12, after the peace talks in Islamabad, Vance made a gesture as he boarded Air Force Two. Source: Jacquelyn Martin/Pool via REUTERS/File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights

After the negotiations broke down, the U.S. immediately announced a maritime blockade of the Strait of Hormuz.

The two-week ceasefire framework was established on April 8, with an expiration date of April 22. On the eve of expiration, the situation sharply deteriorated: Iran had yet to confirm whether it would attend the second round of talks, and Pakistan’s information minister publicly stated, “No formal reply has been received to date.” Pakistan had preemptively strengthened security in Islamabad, with security personnel now present around Serena Hotel—this detail itself indicated Pakistan was still waiting for Iran’s confirmation.

Vance was scheduled to fly again to Islamabad, but after a series of internal White House meetings, the trip was indefinitely postponed. The Wall Street Journal reported more directly: Trump privately discussed canceling the trip entirely, citing Iran’s unwillingness to make concessions on uranium enrichment. Iran’s negotiating team then formally informed the U.S. through Pakistani intermediaries that, under these circumstances, participating in negotiations was a waste of time because the U.S. was blocking any substantive agreement.

Meanwhile, Trump faced enormous internal political pressure.

Deutsche Bank developed a “Pressure Index,” combining inflation expectations and U.S. Treasury yields to predict the timing of White House policy shifts. According to this framework, when oil prices approach $95–$100 per barrel, the White House’s statements tend to soften; only when the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield nears 4.5% does real policy pressure emerge.

Currently, WTI has already broken through $90. If the ceasefire expires and the situation escalates again, breaking $100 per barrel is not hard to imagine. Gasoline prices at stations exceeding $4 per gallon historically have a strong impact on U.S. public opinion.

Additionally, Trump plans to visit China in mid-May, aiming to appear as a “victor” rather than a “wartime president.” This time window gives Iran more bargaining chips and provides Washington with greater flexibility regarding the deadline.

From this perspective, the phrase “indefinite extension” seems more like a political posture aimed at domestic audiences rather than a diplomatic concession to Iran. It provides Trump with room to delay without declaring failure.

In this context, Trump announced the extension.

Axios’s analysis hits the mark: although this extension avoided restarting war and large-scale regional escalation, it weakened Trump’s bargaining chips. A credible military threat relies on the authenticity of the countdown. Every TACO cycle depletes the credibility of the next threat.

Internal Divisions in Iran

Iran’s response is divided, with clear tension between moderates and hardliners.

Iran’s state TV’s tone is a victory narrative: Iran is the “victor on the battlefield,” controlling the Strait of Hormuz is its most valuable bargaining chip, and Iran agrees to a pause in military fighting, but “the war is not over.” Meanwhile, Iran’s state TV warns that the precondition for negotiations is that no topics involving “violating Iran’s independence and dignity” are discussed, primarily including defense and missile capabilities, nuclear capabilities, and technology.

Hardliners’ rhetoric is more direct. An advisor to Iran’s parliament speaker said, “Trump’s ceasefire extension is meaningless; the party that failed cannot dictate terms,” and warned that this extension is “an attempt to buy time for a surprise attack.”

But there are also moderate voices. Iran’s UN ambassador, Iravani, said the government has received “some signals” from the U.S. indicating readiness to lift the blockade, and once the blockade is lifted, “the next round of negotiations will be held in Islamabad.” He also emphasized that the maritime blockade itself violates the ceasefire agreement, and lifting the blockade is a prerequisite for new negotiations. When asked how confident he was about the prospects, he replied, “We should give it a chance; we are hopeful.”

The core contradictions remain unchanged: the U.S. demands complete denuclearization, while Iran wants the blockade lifted first. Both sides are using delay tactics to buy space.

What’s Next for Bitcoin?

It’s very clear that over the past two weeks, Bitcoin’s price has been almost entirely driven by Middle East geopolitical narratives rather than macroeconomic factors.

Last Friday, Bitcoin surged to $78,300, hitting a new high since early February. Then Iran announced closing the Strait of Hormuz, and the price retreated to the $75k–$76,000 range. On April 19, after U.S. forces seized the “TOUSKA” cargo ship, Bitcoin briefly fell below $74,000. After news of the ceasefire extension on April 21, the price rebounded to break $76,000 that day, pushing the overall crypto market up over 1%, with total market cap rising to $2.55 trillion.

Every price point corresponds to a specific battlefield event.

Institutional demand has not disappeared. Bitcoin spot ETF saw about $1.29 billion in net inflows from April 14 to 17, with even higher inflows around April 10, reaching about $1.1 billion, closely aligned with the Islamabad negotiations and ceasefire expectations.

Rachel Lucas, an analyst at BTC Markets, said: “Bitcoin’s current resilience is less about narrative and more about market mechanics. Institutional buyers, especially corporate funds, are aggressively accumulating on every dip.” She also pointed out that this rally coincides with market attention on Fed Chair candidate Waller’s hearings—investors are betting on the direction of monetary policy.

But internal structural data signals are less optimistic.

After returning above $75,000, perpetual contract funding rates have remained negative. Negative funding rates mean that short positions dominate the derivatives market. In other words: spot prices are rising, but the bullish structural forces are not keeping pace; this rebound is more driven by short covering than new longs entering.

Deribit data confirms this: about $1.5 billion in Bitcoin put options cluster around $60k, while $25.5k in call options are near $70k. The overlap creates a fuzzy directional bias in the options structure.

Thielen, head of research at 10x Research, agrees: “This rally has not been accompanied by significant bullish options buying; the market is essentially short-covering rather than trending upward.”

Hughes from Tokenize Capital suggests the rally may weaken next month, with further downside risk in August.

More pessimistically, on-chain data from CryptoQuant indicates downward pressure on Bitcoin’s price, with a mid-term test of around $70,000 support likely. If on-chain momentum continues to weaken, deeper corrections could reach the $56k range. Morgan Stanley strategist Denny Galindo said Bitcoin is currently in the “autumn” phase of its four-year cycle, and winter is approaching.

If the ceasefire persists and signals of actual opening of the Strait of Hormuz emerge, some analysts believe Bitcoin could surge to $80,000 before the end of April. But this scenario depends on a long chain of conditions: ceasefire holds, blockade is lifted, negotiations advance, global energy supply stabilizes, and market risk appetite truly opens.

Tariffs, threats to allies, pressure on the Fed—each TACO moment arrives as expected, and those betting on reversals profit.

But TACO is not a natural law; it’s a predictive model based on past behavior. The nature of Iran war and trade negotiations differs. It involves military casualties, sovereignty dignity, and domestic political red lines. Each TACO cycle consumes the remaining mutual trust in negotiations and market maneuvering space. This also means that someday, TACO might completely fail.