IRAN: Iran and the United States have entered decisive negotiations on Tehran’s nuclear programme, with Iranian officials insisting that a potential agreement remains within reach provided Washington recognises Iran’s symbolic right to enrich uranium, permits the dilution of stockpiles of highly enriched uranium and avoids imposing restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile programme.
Iranian diplomats regard these three conditions as essential for success, arguing that recognition of enrichment for peaceful purposes is consistent with international norms. However, it remains unclear whether the US administration will accept them. The US secretary of state, Marco Rubio, warned that failure to engage on missile issues would pose serious obstacles to progress.
US special envoy Steve Witkoff is leading the delegation to Geneva alongside advisers including Jared Kushner. Iranian officials claim that similar principles were discussed in earlier rounds of indirect talks, though no agreement was reached. They say the American proposal reportedly focuses on limiting enrichment to below five per cent purity – a level consistent with the 2015 nuclear agreement and far below weapons-grade thresholds – and converting the programme to civilian use.
However, Iranian negotiators say the proposal contains no immediate commitments on sanctions relief or diplomatic relations, leaving the country under economic pressure. They anticipate that subsequent stages of negotiations could explore gradual sanctions easing and broader dialogue. Western officials have not confirmed these accounts.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated that Tehran seeks a “fair and just agreement” and reiterated Iran’s longstanding position that it will never pursue nuclear weapons while insisting on its right to peaceful nuclear technology. He said diplomacy offered the best path to resolution, though progress depends on reciprocal concessions.
The negotiations unfold amid contrasting political messaging. In a recent address, the US president criticised Iran’s missile programme and alleged support for regional militancy, while questioning Tehran’s nuclear assurances. Iranian officials rejected the claims, insisting that their programme is peaceful and that accusations of weapons ambitions amount to disinformation.
US pulling non-essential staff from embassy in Beirut amid Iran tensions
The Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baqaei, accused Washington of propagating what he described as “big lies” about nuclear and security issues, rhetoric that underscores the deep mistrust shaping the talks. US officials reject such characterisations and argue that transparency and verification are vital to any sustainable agreement.
International oversight is expected to play a central role. The presence of the head of the UN nuclear watchdog, Rafael Grossi, at the Geneva discussions is seen as significant because the agency is responsible for verifying compliance with enrichment safeguards. Its assessments will determine whether any commitments meet international standards for non-proliferation.
Diplomatic observers note that both sides recognise the risks of escalation and the potential benefits of compromise. Iranian negotiators are expected to propose mechanisms that could eventually lead to sanctions relief, while the United States seeks guarantees that nuclear activities cannot be diverted for military purposes. The talks represent a critical test of diplomacy in a region already strained by geopolitical tensions.
While prospects for agreement remain uncertain, officials on both sides acknowledge that failure to engage could heighten regional instability. Supporters of the negotiations argue that dialogue offers the best opportunity to address security concerns and strengthen non-proliferation frameworks. Critics caution that deep divisions persist, particularly over missile capabilities and sanctions.
The outcome of the Geneva talks will shape future relations between Tehran and Washington and could influence broader regional dynamics. Diplomats emphasise that progress will require sustained engagement and compromise, with international mediators seeking to bridge differences and encourage confidence-building measures.
