Tensions between Tehran and Washington are once again at the forefront as negotiations aimed at limiting Iran’s nuclear program continue under the shadow of possible military escalation. Diplomatic efforts have resumed, but clear differences remain — particularly over the issue of sanctions relief.
A senior Iranian official said to Reuters that Iran and the U.S. are not aligned in their views on lifting sanctions, underscoring one of the central sticking points in the renewed discussions. According to the official, another round of talks is expected in early March, even as concerns grow about a potential military confrontation in the region.
Growing Military Pressure Adds Urgency
The renewed diplomatic engagement comes at a time when the United States is increasing its military presence in the Middle East. This buildup has intensified fears of a broader conflict, particularly as rhetoric on both sides sharpens.
Iran has warned that it would retaliate by targeting U.S. military bases in the region if American forces launch an attack. Such warnings highlight the fragile environment surrounding the negotiations, where diplomatic overtures exist alongside overt threats.
Despite these tensions, both sides have returned to the table to address their decades-long dispute over Iran’s nuclear activities — a conflict that has shaped regional politics and global diplomacy for years.
Sanctions Relief: The Core Dispute
At the heart of the current talks lies a fundamental disagreement over sanctions.
Iran maintains that any agreement must include a clear and realistic timeline for lifting economic sanctions imposed by the United States. Iranian officials argue that these measures have severely strained the country’s economy and must be meaningfully addressed for diplomacy to succeed.
“The most recent discussions revealed clear differences between U.S. proposals and Iran’s expectations regarding how and when sanctions should be removed,” the senior official said. He emphasized that both sides need to agree on a practical and mutually beneficial roadmap for easing restrictions.
Tehran insists that any framework must be built on balanced interests rather than unilateral concessions.
Nuclear Enrichment: A Persistent Flashpoint
Another major point of contention is uranium enrichment.
Washington has pushed for a “zero enrichment” policy, arguing that domestic enrichment activities in Iran could provide a pathway to nuclear weapons. Tehran, however, firmly rejects this demand. Iranian leaders insist their nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes and deny any ambition to develop nuclear weapons.
Iran’s position centers on the recognition of its right to enrich uranium for civilian use, a right it says is protected under international agreements.
The United States has also demanded that Iran surrender its stockpile of highly enriched uranium (HEU). According to estimates from the United Nations nuclear watchdog last year, Iran possesses over 440 kilograms of uranium enriched to up to 60% purity — close to the 90% level typically associated with weapons-grade material.
Tehran has signaled potential flexibility. The Iranian official indicated that the country could consider exporting part of its enriched uranium stockpile, lowering the enrichment levels of some material, and even participating in a regional nuclear enrichment consortium. However, these steps would come only if Iran’s right to peaceful enrichment is formally acknowledged.
Possibility of an Interim Agreement
Despite the disagreements, diplomatic channels remain open.
Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araqchi, recently stated that Tehran is preparing a draft counterproposal. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump has suggested he is weighing limited military options — remarks that further complicate the atmosphere of negotiation.
Still, the Iranian official suggested that an interim agreement remains possible. Such a temporary deal could serve as a confidence-building measure while more comprehensive terms are negotiated.
“The talks are ongoing, and there is a realistic chance of reaching a provisional understanding,” he said.
Economic Incentives on the Table
Iranian authorities argue that diplomacy could generate significant economic benefits for both countries.
Tehran has reportedly proposed economic opportunities for American companies as part of a broader package under discussion. This includes potential investment in Iran’s oil sector — one of the country’s most vital industries.
However, Iranian officials have made it clear that national sovereignty remains non-negotiable. Tehran will not relinquish ownership or control over its oil and mineral resources.
According to the senior official, U.S. firms could participate as contractors in oil and gas projects but would not gain controlling stakes.
“Ultimately, the United States could become an economic partner, but nothing beyond that,” he stated.
A Delicate Balancing Act
The renewed negotiations reflect a delicate balancing act between diplomacy and deterrence. Both nations face domestic and international pressures, and each must weigh the risks of compromise against the costs of confrontation.
While fundamental differences remain — especially over sanctions and enrichment rights — both sides appear aware that failure to reach an agreement could push the region closer to instability.
For now, the prospect of early March talks keeps the diplomatic door open. Whether those discussions lead to a breakthrough or further deadlock will depend largely on whether Washington and Tehran can bridge their deep divide over sanctions relief and nuclear policy.
