Geneva talks: Iran signals firm resolve, rejects US pressure, proceeds with cautious optimism

By Richard Medhurst

The third and latest round of nuclear talks between Iran and the United States concluded after two intensive sessions on Thursday: an initial meeting early in the day, followed by a closing session in the evening.

While US officials, including the lead negotiator Steve Witkoff, have remained silent, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi expressed "limited optimism" following the conclusion of the latest round of talks, signaling cautious hope for continued dialogue.

These negotiations occur against a backdrop of heightened regional tension, as the United States and Israel have amplified threats of military action against Iran for weeks.

US demands raise legal and political concerns

In recent weeks, the United States and Israel have intensified war rhetoric, warning of potential military action against Iran. During the Geneva talks, the United States reportedly presented several key demands, which include:

• Complete closure of Iran’s three primary nuclear facilities: the Natanz and Fordow enrichment sites and the Isfahan facility.
• Mandatory export of Iran’s entire stockpile of Highly Enriched Uranium (HEU).
• Adoption of a "Zero Enrichment" policy, prohibiting Iran from any future domestic enrichment activities.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio further expanded the scope of the negotiations by raising concerns regarding Iran’s ballistic missile program.

These demands present significant legal and political challenges.

Observers argue that the closure of these sites and a zero-enrichment mandate violate Iran’s right to civilian nuclear energy under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT)., of which it is a signatory, unlike Israel.

Furthermore, these terms are far more restrictive than the 3.67% enrichment limit established under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal.

The JCPOA was famously abandoned by Donald Trump during his first term, in May 2018, despite repeated verifications from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that Iran was in full compliance with the agreement’s monitoring protocols.

European signatories also failed to salvage the deal after the unilateral and illegal American exit, succumbing to American pressure.

Iran’s position and the role of the IAEA

As with previous negotiations, Iran’s primary objective remains the lifting of unilateral US sanctions, which Tehran rightly maintains are illegal under international law.

To date, the United States has yet to present a credible mechanism guaranteeing comprehensive sanctions relief or safeguards to prevent a future U.S. withdrawal from a new agreement.

In a social media post before heading to Geneva for the third round of nuclear diplomacy with the US, Foreign Minister Araghchi explicitly stated that Iran will "under no circumstances ever develop nuclear weapons”.

This policy is rooted in a long-standing fatwa (religious decree) issued by Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei and Iran’s stated commitment to international nonproliferation.

That is precisely what President Masoud Pezeshkian and head of Iran’s Defense Council Ali Shamkhani also categorically said on Thursday, amid the latest round of talks in Geneva.

Disputes over enrichment and missile program

Iran has clearly and categorically rejected proposals to export its highly enriched uranium or permanently close its nuclear facilities.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, who was present in Geneva on Thursday and participated in the indirect Iran-US talks as a technical observer, continues to seek access for inspectors to verify the status of facilities targeted by US and Israeli strikes in June 2025.

These talks follow the "12-Day War" in June 2025, during which Israel targeted several Iranian nuclear sites and assassinated senior nuclear scientists in their homes.

It was followed by what the Americans call “Operation Midnight Hammer,” in which the US targeted three key nuclear facilities in Natanz, Fordow and Isfahan, in brazen violation of international law.

After that, the United States and Israel claimed that Iran’s nuclear capabilities had been severely degraded. However, continued demands for facility closures have raised questions about the extent of that damage and the strategic objectives behind ongoing negotiations.

President Trump had claimed these sites were "obliterated," a stance that Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei slammed as "inconsistent" with current US demands to formally "close" and dismantle those same facilities.

This contradiction raises a critical question: if Washington is so confident in the destruction it previously claimed to have inflicted, why is it now pressuring Iran for a diplomatic surrender of facilities that supposedly no longer exist?

Concerns over mediation and military buildup

The US negotiating team, led by Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner and West Asia envoy Steve Witkoff, has faced significant scrutiny. Observers point to Kushner’s lack of traditional diplomatic experience and both men’s perceived pro-Israel stances as potential conflicts of interest that complicate the neutral ground required for diplomacy.

This has raised serious and legitimate questions about a potential conflict of interest, particularly given Israel’s long-standing advocacy for the total destruction of Iran’s defensive and nuclear capabilities.

Interestingly, just days before the two sides reconvened in Geneva, Witkoff claimed in an interview with Fox News that Iran was “weeks away” from building a nuclear weapon.

This diplomatic pressure is backed by the largest buildup of US forces in regional history—surpassing even the 2003 invasion of Iraq. The USS Gerald R. Ford, USS Abraham Lincoln and multiple carrier strike groups are currently deployed in a show of force.

According to flight trackers and open-source intelligence (OSINT), even after the latest round of talks in Geneva ended, the US was still heavily amassing cargo and military hardware, with scores of planes departing American bases in Europe for the region.

Next round of nuclear diplomacy

Diplomatic discussions are scheduled to resume in Vienna within the coming week, as Araghchi announced to the media after the conclusion of the latest round.

Technical teams from both sides are expected to meet to address detailed provisions and the potential implementation mechanism.

Iran is negotiating in good faith, underpinned by the necessary political will to secure an agreement. However, it remains to be seen how the Americans choose to proceed following the latest round of talks.

What is clear is that there is no military solution to Iran’s nuclear file. Diplomacy remains the only viable path forward.

Richard Medhurst is a Vienna-based, Syrian-British independent journalist and commentator. 

(The views expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect those of Press TV)

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.ir