Iran has indicated a renewed willingness to engage in negotiations with the United States over its nuclear programme, signalling that progress toward an agreement could be possible if Washington demonstrates readiness to ease economic sanctions. The development comes at a sensitive diplomatic moment marked by escalating regional tensions, military warnings, and growing international concern over the risk of confrontation. With a new round of talks scheduled in Geneva, cautious optimism has emerged that diplomacy may still offer a pathway out of a prolonged and complex standoff.
In a recent interview with the BBC, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi stated that responsibility for advancing negotiations now rests largely with the United States. According to him, Tehran believes that meaningful progress depends on whether Washington can show genuine intent to reach a deal. He emphasized that Iran remains open to discussions on placing limits on aspects of its nuclear programme, provided that sanctions relief forms a central component of any future agreement. His remarks reflected Iran’s position that concessions must be reciprocal rather than one-sided.
These statements arrive amid continued criticism from American officials, who argue that Iran has slowed momentum in negotiations that have stretched on for years. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently acknowledged that President Donald Trump favors a negotiated settlement but described reaching such an agreement as extremely challenging. At the same time, Trump has issued warnings that military action could remain an option if diplomatic efforts fail to curb Iran’s nuclear ambitions, while the United States has increased its military presence across the region as a show of deterrence.
Diplomatic engagement resumed earlier in February when US and Iranian representatives conducted indirect discussions in Oman, mediated through regional intermediaries. Takht-Ravanchi confirmed that a follow-up round of talks is scheduled to take place in Geneva, describing the initial exchanges as generally constructive, though still at an early stage. Both sides have characterized the Oman discussions as cautiously positive, suggesting that channels of communication remain open despite deep mistrust.
Iran has attempted to demonstrate flexibility by proposing measures related to its stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 percent purity. This enrichment level approaches weapons-grade material and has intensified international suspicion that Iran could be moving closer to nuclear weapons capability, an allegation Tehran consistently rejects. Iranian officials maintain that their nuclear activities remain peaceful and compliant with national rights under international agreements. Takht-Ravanchi reiterated that Iran is prepared to discuss limits on enrichment levels and related technical issues if sanctions relief is seriously addressed during negotiations.
When asked whether Iran would agree to export or reduce its existing stockpile of more than 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium—similar to arrangements made under the 2015 nuclear deal—he avoided firm commitments, stating that it was too early to predict specific outcomes while negotiations are still developing. Russia, which previously accepted large quantities of Iran’s low-enriched uranium under the earlier agreement, has reportedly indicated willingness to play a similar role again if a new arrangement is reached.
One of the most contentious issues remains uranium enrichment itself. The United States has historically demanded that Iran halt enrichment activities entirely, a condition Tehran strongly rejects. Takht-Ravanchi made clear that a “zero enrichment” requirement is unacceptable from Iran’s perspective and is no longer considered negotiable. Iranian officials argue that maintaining a civilian enrichment programme is a legal right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, framing total cessation as an infringement on national sovereignty.
Tehran has also drawn firm boundaries around the scope of negotiations, insisting that its ballistic missile programme will not be included in any agreement. This stance comes despite pressure from Israel and calls from some US officials to expand talks beyond nuclear issues. Iranian leaders view their missile capabilities as essential for national defence, particularly following past regional conflicts. Takht-Ravanchi argued that Iran cannot agree to restrictions that would weaken its defensive capacity, especially after experiencing military threats and attacks in recent years.
The diplomatic discussions are unfolding alongside rising regional anxiety fueled by increasingly sharp rhetoric. Trump has occasionally referenced the possibility of regime change in Iran, though Iranian officials claim such language does not align with private diplomatic messages conveyed through Oman’s foreign minister, Sayyid Badr bin Hamad Al-Busaidi, who continues to serve as a mediator between the two sides. According to Tehran, communications received through intermediaries suggest the United States remains interested in resolving disputes through peaceful negotiation rather than conflict.
Iran has expressed concern about the growing US military presence in the Middle East, warning that any new war would have devastating consequences across the region. Takht-Ravanchi cautioned that armed conflict would be harmful to all parties involved and could destabilize an already fragile geopolitical environment. He also reiterated Iran’s longstanding warning that American military bases in the region could become targets if hostilities were to escalate, noting that more than 40,000 US troops are currently stationed across nearby countries.
Regional actors have intensified diplomatic efforts to prevent escalation, with countries such as Qatar actively engaging in dialogue aimed at reducing tensions. Iranian officials claim there is broad regional consensus against the outbreak of another conflict, reflecting widespread concern that a war could disrupt economic stability, energy markets, and regional security arrangements.
Trust between the negotiating parties remains fragile. Iranian authorities have accused Israel of attempting to undermine diplomatic progress, referencing a surprise military strike last year that triggered a brief but intense conflict shortly before scheduled negotiations. Tehran has also voiced frustration over what it perceives as shifting American negotiating positions, arguing that inconsistent messaging complicates efforts to build confidence.
Despite persistent scepticism among analysts regarding the likelihood of a breakthrough, Iranian officials maintain that diplomacy remains preferable to confrontation. Takht-Ravanchi stated that Iran will approach the Geneva talks with cautious hope, emphasizing that success depends on mutual sincerity and tangible steps from both sides. As negotiations resume, the coming discussions are widely viewed as a critical test of whether diplomacy can overcome years of mistrust and avert further escalation in one of the world’s most sensitive geopolitical disputes.
