International press reports have revealed complex details of the nuclear negotiations that took place between Tehran and Washington prior to the outbreak of the current military confrontation. Sources indicated that the diplomatic path witnessed sharp fluctuations with changing American demands and the Iranian side's adherence to its sovereign positions, ultimately leading to a stalemate followed by a comprehensive military explosion in the region.
Political sources reported that fundamental questions still surround the objectives of the Israeli-American war against Iran, which has entered its third week. American officials claimed during negotiation rounds that Tehran was on the verge of possessing a nuclear weapon, accusing Iranian negotiators of boasting about their technical capabilities, which Washington considered a pretext for launching preemptive strikes to prevent a potential Iranian attack.
Negotiations held last February saw significant progress with Omani and Qatari mediation, as regional parties sought to push for a peaceful solution behind the scenes. Regional sources expressed their deep concern about the sequence of events that led to the collapse, noting that reaching a permanent solution has become extremely difficult given the current situation.
Iran and the United States had held five rounds of negotiations to resolve nuclear disputes, but these talks suffered a major setback in June 2025. At that time, Israel launched a surprise attack, in which Washington participated by bombing three key nuclear sites, leading Tehran to view American diplomacy as a cover for specific military operations.
Despite the lack of trust, Tehran agreed to return to the negotiating table in Muscat earlier this year, with Qatar emerging as a crucial player in facilitating agreement on the agenda. High-ranking Iranian sources confirmed that Washington initially accepted two basic conditions: limiting negotiations to the nuclear file only, and abandoning the demand for zero enrichment within Iranian territory.
The first meeting between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the American delegation, which included Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, witnessed frank discussions. Araghchi expressed his readiness to reach a final agreement with full authority, while the American delegation hinted for the first time at the possibility of accepting a certain level of uranium enrichment within Iranian facilities.
One of the most prominent points of contention was Iran's stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, which amounted to approximately 440.9 kilograms, a quantity theoretically sufficient to produce ten nuclear bombs. Although the American side considered the disclosure of these figures a kind of threat, Tehran stressed that it aimed to highlight the extent of concessions that could be made.
Sources indicated that the lack of technical expertise among the American delegation annoyed Iranian negotiators, as Araghchi had to explain the technical differences between reactors and enrichment facilities. In contrast, Kushner tried to introduce economic dimensions to the negotiations, proposing an 'economic complement' to any political agreement reached between the two countries.
As negotiations moved to Geneva in mid-February, Britain entered the mediation line through National Security Advisor Jonathan Powell. Despite the initial positive atmosphere, the American delegation surprised its Iranian counterpart with new demands related to dismantling the 'Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz' facilities that had been previously bombed, and building alternative above-ground centers.
Tehran rejected this demand, considering it an attempt to make its facilities exposed and easily destructible in any future confrontation. Both parties summoned the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Rafael Grossi, who confirmed that international inspection is not affected by the location of the facility, whether underground or above ground, which embarrassed the American negotiating position at the time.
In an attempt to salvage the path, Iran presented a proposal that would ensure no accumulation of enriched uranium by converting it directly into solid fuel under full international supervision. The two parties initially agreed on six guiding principles, including lifting sanctions, economic cooperation, and peaceful coexistence, with a promise to draft an initial draft at the subsequent meeting.
The last round on February 26 witnessed severe tension with increasing American military buildup in the region, as Araghchi warned that failure would mean a return to war. Despite the length and seriousness of the session, Washington escalated its demands to freeze enrichment for up to ten years after a direct call with Trump, which Tehran considered a retreat from understandings.
Despite progress in other technical files and an agreement to continue discussions in Vienna, Arab and international optimism quickly evaporated. Mediators confirmed that the American delegation had promised that there were no plans for an imminent military attack, which proved to be untrue just hours after the end of the Geneva round.
The diplomatic path ended dramatically less than 48 hours after the last Geneva meeting, following the assassination of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in an Israeli raid in Tehran. This development led to the collapse of all communication channels and the launch of the comprehensive war that diplomacy had desperately tried to avoid for the past months.
Araghchi to Witkoff: If we fail today, you will attack again and we will defend ourselves, and no one will win, then you will return to the table and perhaps you will not find anyone to negotiate with.
شارك برأيك
Behind the Scenes of the Final Moments: How the Diplomatic Path Between Tehran and Washington Collapsed Before the Big Explosion?