US Iran nuclear talks entered a decisive phase on Thursday as senior negotiators from Tehran and Washington convened in Geneva amid sharply diverging rhetoric from the White House and cautious optimism from Iranian officials who insist an agreement remains within reach if previously agreed conditions are respected.
Iranian diplomats say the talks hinge on three core principles: recognition of Iran’s symbolic right to enrich uranium at low levels, permission to dilute existing stockpiles of highly enriched material, and the exclusion of Tehran’s ballistic missile programme from the nuclear framework.
While these parameters were reportedly accepted during earlier indirect rounds, uncertainty now surrounds whether Donald Trump will ultimately endorse them.
The negotiations are taking place against a volatile backdrop of regional military pressure, domestic unrest inside Iran, and political posturing in Washington that has raised fears the fragile diplomatic track could collapse.
Iranian officials warn that any retreat from the agreed principles would not merely stall progress but could rapidly push the two countries toward open confrontation.
“The possibility of reaching an agreement exists,” Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi said before departing for Geneva. “But that possibility depends entirely on whether diplomacy is prioritised and whether commitments already made are respected.”
According to Iranian sources familiar with the negotiations, US special envoy Steve Witkoff had accepted limits on enrichment capped below 5% purity during earlier talks, roughly in line with thresholds set under the 2015 nuclear accord.
Such levels are widely considered suitable for civilian energy and medical purposes and far below weapons-grade material.
One Iranian source close to the talks described the initial American proposal as “surprisingly flexible”, noting that it focused narrowly on enrichment limits rather than broader strategic concessions. “The central request was simple,” the source said. “Limit enrichment, convert the programme fully to civilian use, and allow verification.”
What the proposal notably did not include, however, was immediate sanctions relief. Tehran would remain under heavy economic restrictions, with any easing deferred to later negotiations.
Iranian officials say this sequencing leaves the country “in economic handcuffs” while it demonstrates compliance, a structure that has long fuelled mistrust.
The absence of sanctions relief remains one of the most sensitive points in the US Iran nuclear talks, particularly as Iran grapples with inflation, currency weakness, and ongoing protests at universities across the country.
Demonstrations have continued for weeks, with security forces deployed heavily on campuses.
Despite the cautious tone from Tehran, mixed signals from Washington have cast a shadow over the process. Speaking on Wednesday, US secretary of state Marco Rubio warned that Iran’s refusal to negotiate over ballistic missiles would pose “a big problem”, suggesting the administration remains divided over how narrow the nuclear framework should be.
Those remarks contrasted sharply with earlier positions attributed to Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, both of whom have been closely involved in the back-channel diplomacy. Iranian officials claim those envoys explicitly agreed that missile issues would be kept separate from nuclear constraints.
The uncertainty was compounded by Trump’s combative tone during his recent State of the Union address, delivered just hours before the Geneva talks were set to begin.
In the speech, Trump accused Iran of continuing to pursue nuclear weapons ambitions, described Tehran as the world’s leading sponsor of terrorism, and warned that Iranian missiles could soon reach Europe.
“We wiped it out and they want to start all over again,” Trump said, referring to US strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities last year. “Iran is, at this moment, again pursuing their sinister ambitions.”
Iranian officials reacted with fury, accusing the president of undermining his own negotiators. “Our positions are completely clear,” Araghchi said shortly after the speech.
“Iran will never, under any circumstances, seek to develop nuclear weapons. But we will also never forgo our right to peaceful nuclear technology.”
The Iranian foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei went further, accusing the Trump administration of conducting what he called a campaign of “disinformation and misinformation” against Iran.
In a post on social media, Baqaei likened the president’s rhetoric to propaganda techniques employed by authoritarian regimes.
At the centre of the Geneva talks is the presence of International Atomic Energy Agency director general Rafael Grossi, whose participation is viewed by Tehran as a crucial confidence-building measure.
Grossi has the legal authority to assess whether Iran’s proposed access for inspectors meets international verification standards.
“The verification component is essential,” one European diplomat said. “If Grossi is satisfied, it becomes much harder for either side to claim non-compliance.”
Grossi himself struck a sombre note before the talks, warning that time was short. “A very dangerous situation is developing,” he said, citing the scale of the US military buildup in the region and the risk of miscalculation if diplomacy fails.
Iranian negotiators are also acutely aware of Trump’s domestic political constraints. According to officials close to the talks, Tehran is prepared to frame any agreement in ways that allow the US president to claim he has secured a stronger deal than the one reached under Barack Obama in 2015.
“They understand that Trump needs to sell this at home,” said Hamzeh Safavi, a political science professor at Tehran University. “The substance matters, but so does the narrative.”
Safavi added that while Iran is unlikely to accept a demand for zero enrichment, it could tolerate symbolic enrichment under strict monitoring. “What is important for Iran is the principle,” he said. “The right to enrich cannot become a tool for hostage-taking.”
Read also:Disputes over Hamas disarmament stall Gaza Peace Plan progress as Israel pushes ultimatum
Iran has previously agreed to suspend enrichment altogether. In 2003, then-national security council secretary Hassan Rouhani reached an agreement with European powers to halt enrichment temporarily and allow snap inspections. Iranian officials argue this history demonstrates flexibility when reciprocity is assured.
As the US Iran nuclear talks continue in Geneva, the stakes extend far beyond centrifuge counts and inspection regimes. Failure could deepen Iran’s isolation, inflame unrest at home, and raise the risk of a wider conflict engulfing the Middle East.
Success, even in limited form, could stabilise a volatile region and reopen channels long closed by mutual suspicion.
“For now, diplomacy is still alive,” Araghchi said. “But it cannot survive on words alone.”
About The Author
