High-stakes talks between the U.S. and Iran over a permanent end to Tehran’s nuclear program continued late Thursday, with significant disagreements leaving open the possibility of a U.S. military assault on Iran.
Negotiations at a Critical Stage
Iran’s foreign ministry sought to downplay suggestions that the talks in Geneva had collapsed, stating that new proposals had been raised requiring further consultation in both capitals.
The lead U.S. negotiator, Steve Witkoff, paused discussions with Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, to meet with Ukrainian negotiators in the Swiss city before returning to the talks.
Omani mediators also dismissed reports of a breakdown, asserting that new and creative ideas were being exchanged with unprecedented openness during what is being described as a third decisive round of indirect consultations.
Key Demands and Impasses
The U.S. is demanding permanent Iranian guarantees regarding uranium enrichment and inspection mechanisms to ensure Tehran will not develop a nuclear weapon, a goal Iran has consistently denied pursuing.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio stated that Iran’s refusal to discuss its ballistic missile program is a major obstacle, prompting complaints from Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, regarding inconsistencies in U.S. negotiating demands.
The talks are occurring amid an unprecedented U.S. military buildup in the region, including two aircraft carrier strike groups, attack aircraft, refueling equipment, and submarines equipped with Tomahawk missiles.
A central point of contention is whether the U.S. will attempt to limit Iran’s uranium enrichment to minimal levels, such as for medical purposes at the Tehran research reactor – a facility dating back to 1967 and originally supplied by the U.S.
Iran views the right to enrich uranium domestically as a matter of national sovereignty, a concession previously granted by the U.S. in the 2015 nuclear deal.
President Trump has claimed that U.S. bunker-busting bombs destroyed Iran’s three main nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan last June, rendering high-level uranium enrichment technically impossible for the foreseeable future. Tehran has denied the UN’s nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), access to inspect the extent of the damage.
Rubio stated Wednesday, “They’re not enriching right now, but they’re trying to get to the point where they ultimately can.”
A U.S. demand for the permanent dismantling of the three facilities conflicts with Iran’s proposal to allow low-level enrichment under UN supervision, potentially after three to five years – a plan the U.S. did not previously object to.
Stockpile Concerns and Further Disputes
Another impasse concerns Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity, nearing weapons-grade levels. The IAEA reports that Tehran has not disclosed the location of a 400kg stockpile – sufficient to build five to six bombs comparable to the one used on Nagasaki in 1945. The IAEA also estimated in May of last year that Iran possessed 8,000kg of uranium enriched to 20% or below.
The highly-enriched stockpile could be down-blended within Iran, as Tehran suggests, or exported to Russia or the U.S. A complete transfer of Iran’s 8,000kg stockpile to the U.S. would be a significant concession, potentially leading to the lifting of U.S. and UN economic sanctions.
One Iranian official in Geneva insisted, “The principles of zero enrichment forever, dismantling of nuclear facilities and transferring uranium stocks to the US is completely rejected.”
Trump has the military capacity to strike Iran, either as part of a broader assault aimed at regime change or a more targeted strike intended to compel Tehran to adopt a more flexible negotiating stance. While Trump’s negotiating deadlines have been flexible, his military commanders are concerned about maintaining such a large and costly force deployment indefinitely.
Trump faces domestic pressure to demonstrate progress in the negotiations, with Democrats calling for a Congressional vote on what they describe as a “war of choice.” An Associated Press poll this week revealed that 56% of Americans do not trust Trump to make the right decision regarding the use of military force outside the U.S.
The director general of the IAEA, Rafael Grossi, has become central to the talks, as his endorsement is needed to convince Washington that Iran’s guarantees on future low-level enrichment can be technically verified.
Tehran is also maintaining that it will not negotiate on non-nuclear issues, including its ballistic missile program and support for “resistance groups” across the Middle East, describing its ballistic missiles – some with a range of 1,300 miles (2,000km) – as purely defensive.
Rubio stated Wednesday that the ballistic missile program must be addressed eventually, acknowledging it may not be on the immediate agenda but cannot be excluded from future discussions.
He said, “Iran refuses to discuss the range of its missiles with us or anyone else, and this is a big problem for us. Iran has missiles that increase their range every year, and this could be a threat to the United States because the range of the missiles may reach American soil.” He also noted that short-range missiles could target U.S. bases in the region.
“For a country that’s facing sanctions, whose economy is in tatters, whose people are suffering – and somehow they still find the money to invest in missiles of greater and greater capacity every year. This is an unsustainable threat,” he said.
Discover more from Archyworldys
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
