Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi recently outlined that restarted nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington are contingent upon Washington formally agreeing not to launch military strikes against Iranian territory. Meanwhile, former President Donald Trump made clear he is “not offering Iran anything” or speaking with Tehran as their Nuclear Facilities had been “totally OBLITERATED by us”.
FM Araghchi stressed during a television interview that Iran would only return to talks once it received security assurances from the U.S. “You cannot negotiate while under attack,” he stated, referencing U.S. strikes against Iranian nuclear sites, which caused great mistrust within Iran over what it perceived as violations of diplomatic norms and international agreements.
On June 22nd, the U.S. launched Operation Midnight Hammer airstrikes against Iran’s Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan enrichment facilities using B-2 bombers and Tomahawk missiles reportedly from Operation Midnight Hammer, using B-2s from RFERL and Tomahawk missiles from Tomahawk missiles (sources).
President Trump later hailed the strikes as having been successful in “obliterating” Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, an assessment echoed on Truth Social with: “I am NOT offering Iran ANYTHING… nor talking to them because we totally OBLITERATED their Nuclear Facilities!” Time.com +11; The Guardian +11 and Dawn both published similar accounts (+11).
Although President Donald Trump declared success for the strikes, U.S. intelligence and independent analysts estimate they caused significant damage but failed to eliminate underground facilities or significantly curtail Iran’s nuclear capabilities (en.wikipedia.org/+1 and apnews.com respectively).
Leaked defense intelligence agency assessments revealed setbacks may only delay the program by months and not destroy it completely (reuters.com, apnews.com and politico.com all provide links).
Araghchi attended indirect nuclear talks mediated by Oman this year and noted that military actions undermine the negotiation process. “There should be no fear of being struck during talks,” he stated to reporters. He further asserted that Iran will reengage diplomacy only upon receiving credible no-attack guarantees from the U.S.; otherwise resumption of maximum pressure policy without such safeguards would be unacceptable to Tehran.. Whilst Araghchi held indirect talks mediated by Oman earlier this year and attended indirect nuclear talks mediated by Oman earlier this year, military actions undermine the negotiating process and negotiations, but Araghchi stressed the military actions hinder the negotiations by disrupting negotiations processes by military actions, which can disrupt negotiations as military actions weaken them both as well as negotiations processes. Whilst Araghchi participated at indirect nuclear talks mediated by Oman earlier this year he stressed military actions undermine the negotiation process and threatened military strikes would disrupt talks resumplying maximum pressure policy without adequate safeguards is unacceptable and said Iran is ready to resume diplomacy only once receiving credible no attack guarantees from America with credible no attack guarantees from America without such guarantees it is prepared resuming diplomacy only once such safeguards are received as returning “maximum pressure” policy would restarting without receiving credible no attack guarantees from America as this should never happen again until receiving credible no attack guarantees by U.
Trump has taken an uncompromising position regarding Iran: no dialogue, no incentives; in keeping with his wider strategy. In a follow-up post he disclaimed any comparison with Obama-era JCPOA; writing “Tell phony Democrat Senator Chris Coons that I am offering nothing compared to Obama; nor am I even speaking with them!” www.nypost.com +7 @ theguardian +7 | facebook = 7.
Insiders report that, despite Trump’s rhetoric, his aides are actively exploring backchannel diplomacy led by Special Envoy Steve Witkoff to develop back-channel diplomacy between Iran and North Korea and regional partners that may provide the framework for narrower civil nuclear agreements, according to multiple media reports (en.wikipedia.org +2 and thetimes.co.uk +2).
Public hostility and clandestine diplomacy reflect an obvious strategic tension. Trump’s claims that nuclear talks are no longer necessary “due to our strikes obliterating their program” seem at odds with covert efforts by his administration to keep channels open, even without public commitment or formal offer, whether through public commitment, pledge, or formal offer (reuters.com, politico.com or the times.co.uk, respectively).
Regional implications are profound; Iran has suspended cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and reduced inspections, in response to U.S. aggression – while European powers have called upon both Washington and Tehran to refrain from further escalated behavior or risk sparking wider conflict.
As far as formal talks go, their prospects remain uncertain. Tehran demands formal security assurances while Washington has yet to offer them. With regional deployments, bombed Iranian facilities and growing mistrust among both parties looming large on either side, negotiation seems far off.
At stake is not only Iran’s nuclear future, but also U.S.-Saudi-Israeli alliances and global nonproliferation norms – as well as renewed confrontation in the Middle East.