U.S. says ‘progress made’ in Iran talks

The United States and Iran reported measured progress after a new round of indirect talks in Geneva aimed at resolving the dispute over Tehran’s nuclear programme.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the two sides had reached an understanding on key “guiding principles” for future negotiations. Draft texts will now be prepared and exchanged before the next round, though he stressed that further work is required.

The talks lasted about three hours and were held at the residence of Oman’s ambassador, with Omani officials moving between the American and Iranian delegations. Araghchi described the discussions as more constructive than a previous round held in Oman and said good progress had been made.

“We now have a clear path ahead, which in my view is positive,” he said, while cautioning that a final agreement was not imminent.

U.S. officials confirmed progress but said significant details remain unresolved. Washington expects Tehran to present detailed proposals within two weeks to address the remaining gaps.

Badr Albusaidi, Oman’s foreign minister whose country is mediating the talks, said discussions had made good progress in identifying shared objectives and relevant technical issues, adding that much work remains.

According to three Iranian officials familiar with the negotiations, Iran conveyed a willingness to suspend uranium enrichment for three to five years, potentially covering the remainder of Trump’s presidency, before joining a regional consortium for civilian-grade enrichment. The officials said Iran would dilute its existing uranium stockpile under international inspection.

In return, Tehran is seeking the lifting of U.S. financial and banking sanctions and the removal of restrictions on its oil exports. The same officials said Iran also signalled openness to expanded trade and investment opportunities with the United States, particularly in the energy sector. These proposals have not been publicly confirmed by Washington.

Concerns remain over nuclear enrichment

The U.S. and its European allies continue to express concern that Iran could move towards developing a nuclear weapon, an allegation Tehran denies.

Iran has said the talks focus strictly on its nuclear programme and sanctions relief, while U.S. officials have indicated they also want to address Iran’s ballistic missile capabilities and its support for armed groups across the region.

President Donald Trump said he believed Iran wanted a deal but warned of consequences if negotiations failed. He has previously referred to authorising strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities using B-2 bombers and has ordered a military build-up in the region, including the deployment of two aircraft carriers, according to U.S. officials.

Regional tensions remain elevated. Iran temporarily closed parts of the Strait of Hormuz for naval exercises conducted by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

In remarks delivered shortly after the talks began, Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei responded to the U.S. military deployment by saying that while an aircraft carrier is a dangerous asset, more dangerous than the carrier is the weapon that can send it to the bottom of the sea.

Speaking to Fox News, U.S. Vice President JD Vance  said Iran had agreed to continue discussions but had not yet engaged on certain red lines set by President Donald Trump.

“In some ways it went well. They agreed to meet afterwards. But in other ways, it was very clear that the president has set some red lines that the Iranians are not yet willing to actually acknowledge and work through,” he said.

Vance did not specify which issues Tehran was unwilling to address but reiterated that Washington’s primary objective is to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon.

“We're going to keep on working it. But of course, the president reserves the ability to say when he thinks that diplomacy has reached its natural end. We hope we don't get to that point, but if we do, that will be the president's call,” he added.

The U.S. team was headed by special envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner as part of the Oman-mediated diplomatic track.

• Iran ‘fully prepared to defend itself,' says Iranian FM Araghchi at UN Disarmament Conference
• Geneva talks: Outlook on U.S.–Iran nuclear negotiations and Russia–Ukraine peace efforts
• 'The path for a deal has started,' says FM Araghchi as Iran‑U.S. talks conclude in Geneva

Expert view: Osama Rizvi on U.S.-Iran tensions

Speaking to AnewZ, Osama Rizvi, founder of Rizvi Insights, said that while diplomatic talks may appear positive on the surface, developments on the ground suggest a more complicated picture.

Rizvi said the recent escalation has been building for months, even as negotiations continued.

“While these talks were happening and we may think there could be some positive outcome, on the ground things look different. Recently, there has been consistent military buildup of the U.S. army in the region and in countries around Iran.”

He pointed to increased deployments, including military vehicles, cargo planes and satellite imagery showing additional aircraft and refuelling tankers in regional bases.

“I think they are preparing for a possible military intervention if certain demands are not met,” he said.

Rizvi argued that U.S. demands, particularly regarding missile development and nuclear enrichment, would be difficult for Tehran to accept.

“From an Iranian perspective, ending ballistic missile capabilities would be a high ask. It would likely be one of the non-negotiables. Iran has to consider its regional balance of power.”

Is conflict inevitable?

Asked whether military confrontation is unavoidable, Rizvi said the answer is not straightforward.

“There are two angles,” he said. “The U.S. economy is in a position where further escalation could be difficult domestically. But at the same time, the global oil market may be less vulnerable than before.”

He noted that China holds significant oil reserves, U.S. oil production remains high and South American production is increasing. However, he warned that any disruption in the Strait of Hormuz could have serious geopolitical consequences.

“Iran is signalling that more than 20 percent of global oil supply passes through the Strait of Hormuz. They are showcasing that, if things go south, they may take action. This is political posturing, but it sends a strong message.”

Military signalling and deterrence

Rizvi said Iran’s recent military drills in the Strait of Hormuz are intended to demonstrate readiness and deterrence.

“They are flexing muscle. They want to show that they are capable of disrupting trade if it comes to that,” he said.

On whether Iran could defend itself if struck, Rizvi pointed to previous regional conflicts.

“We have some precedent. In late 2025, during the 12 or 13-day conflict, Iran did a relatively decent job defending itself. Offence is often cheaper than defence. Iran has thousands of ballistic missiles in its inventory.”

He suggested that behind-the-scenes diplomacy may also be playing a role in preventing immediate escalation.

“This does not mean we are seeing a resolution. This is one of the perennial issues of geopolitics. I do not see a short-term solution.”

Shift in U.S. foreign policy?

On broader U.S. strategy, Rizvi said Washington’s approach appears to be shifting.

“U.S. foreign policy has become more aggressive and somewhat more inward-looking. There is more nationalism. At the same time, we see initiatives like the Board of Peace to balance that effect.”

He concluded that uncertainty will continue to define the landscape.

“Things look tricky. Uncertainty is the name of the game. Mini-lateralism may take hold as a governance model between countries.”

Gregory Mathieu on U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations

Speaking to AnewZ, Gregory Mathieu, political analyst based in Stockholm, said the so-called guiding principles in nuclear diplomacy serve as political guardrails rather than a final agreement.

He explained that such principles clarify what each side is prepared to trade, what remains off limits and where the red lines lie. “This is not symbolic. This is a step forward but this is not a deal yet,” he said, adding that in negotiations ... “until there is agreement on everything, there is no agreement at all.”

Mathieu said the likely components under discussion include enrichment level caps, stockpile reductions, centrifuge limits and strengthened verification mechanisms. He noted that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency previously faced difficulties accessing certain facilities, suggesting monitoring provisions could become a central issue.

Sanctions sequencing is also key, he said, as Iran remains under heavy restrictions and has indicated it would take nuclear steps in exchange for relief.

How does this compare to the 2015 deal?

Comparing the talks to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, Mathieu described the process as “a kind of revival” rather than a full replacement. However, he stressed that Iran has made clear its ballistic missile programme is not on the table, limiting the scope strictly to nuclear production.

On the broader strategic context, Mathieu described the situation as a classic “stick and carrot” dynamic. While diplomatic channels remain open, he pointed to the continued U.S. military presence in the region, including the deployment of the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, as evidence that deterrence remains part of the equation.

He added that Iran is also signalling strength through military exercises and rhetoric, underscoring the high-stakes nature of the negotiations.

Mathieu concluded that Iranian negotiators are experienced and adept at managing time, suggesting that the process could remain prolonged as both sides seek leverage.

Tags

News Politics Ukraine Iran Ukraine Russia War Russia Ukraine talks Geneva talks