Iran Nuclear Program: President Pezeshkian Rejects ‘Excessive Demands’ in US Talks

Introduction

In a vital diplomatic declaration, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has asserted that Iran will “now not yield to over the top calls for” relating to its nuclear program. This commerce stance comes as oblique negotiations between Iran and the United States resumed for the primary time since a significant regional escalation in mid-2025. The talks, geared toward reviving the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA), are right away encountering a elementary confrontation over scope: Iran insists discussions be strictly restricted to its nuclear actions, whilst the U.S. seeks to include Iran’s ballistic missile program and regional proxy actions. President Pezeshkian’s speech, delivered right through the forty seventh anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, additionally reiterated Iran’s claimed readiness for complete verification of its nuclear program and its denial of searching for a nuclear weapon. This scaling units the degree for a posh negotiation procedure amid deep-seated mutual mistrust and heightened regional tensions.

Key Points

Background: The US-Iran Nuclear Negotiation Timeline

The JCPOA and Its Unraveling

The present negotiation framework revolves across the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), recurrently referred to as the Iran nuclear deal. Agreed upon in 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 (U.S., UK, France, China, Russia, and Germany), the JCPOA lifted serious cross-border sanctions on Iran in change for strict limits and verification of its nuclear program. The U.S. unilaterally withdrew from the deal in 2018 and re-imposed crippling sanctions, prompting Iran to progressively breach the settlement’s key limits, together with enriching uranium to 60% purity—some distance past the three.67% cap and coming near weapons-grade ranges of 90%.

The 2025 Escalation and Path to Renewed Talks

Negotiations to restore the JCPOA stalled for years. The particular cause for the resumption of talks discussed within the article used to be the most important regional struggle in June 2025. According to the supply, this struggle started with Iran’s direct assault on Israel and concerned next U.S. army moves on Iranian nuclear amenities. This extraordinary change marked a deadly escalation, developing each a heightened chance of a regional struggle and a mutual, albeit reluctant, reputation of the want to de-escalate thru international relations. The oblique talks, most likely mediated through Oman and different events, constitute a wary step again from the threshold.

The Domestic Anniversary Context

President Pezeshkian’s speech used to be delivered on February 11, 2026, marking the forty seventh anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution that overthrew the U.S.-backed Shah. This annual tournament is a cornerstone of the Islamic Republic’s id, that includes large state-organized rallies. The speech at Tehran’s Azadi Square is a extremely symbolic act, the use of a nationalistic platform to undertaking energy and sovereignty to each home and cross-border audiences. The famous heavy safety presence underscores the federal government’s sensitivity to inner dissent, referencing the new national protest motion that used to be met with a serious crackdown.

Analysis: Deconstructing the Stances and Challenges

Iran’s “Excessive Demands” and Strategic Objectives

President Pezeshkian’s word “over the top calls for” is a planned political framing. From Iran’s viewpoint, the core goal is the removing of all U.S. sanctions imposed since 2018 in go back for a go back to JCPOA compliance. Iran perspectives any linkage to its ballistic missile program or reinforce for regional allies (like Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Shiite militias in Iraq and Syria) as a non-starter. Iran considers its missile program a elementary pillar of its protection doctrine and a key deterrent towards adversaries like Israel and the U.S. Its regional alliances are framed as reputable resistance towards overseas affect. Therefore, Iran’s negotiating place seeks to isolate the nuclear record, treating it as a standalone, reversible sanctions-for-compliance change. The insistence on verification is a tactical transfer to claim transparency whilst keeping up the narrative of a relaxed program.

The U.S. “Broad and Deep” Approach

The U.S. place, supported through key allies like Israel and European companions, is that Iran’s nuclear program can’t be seen in isolation. The “most force” marketing campaign that preceded the talks used to be designed to handle the totality of Iranian threats. U.S. negotiators are more likely to push for:

1. Nuclear Constraints: A shorter timeline for critically proscribing enrichment, lowering stockpiles, and re-installing powerful IAEA tracking.
2. Ballistic Missiles: Limits on missile vary, payload, and manufacturing, or a dedication to long run negotiations at the factor.
3. Regional Conduct: Cessation or aid of reinforce for proxy forces that focus on U.S. pursuits and allies.

From the U.S. perspective, addressing handiest the nuclear record leaves Iran with a potent missile arsenal able to handing over a possible long run weapon and the monetary sources from sanctions reduction to additional fund its regional actions.

The Chasm of Trust and Verification

The declare that Iran is in a position for “any verification” will have to be weighed towards a long time of IAEA findings. The UN nuclear watchdog has persistently reported that Iran’s program isn’t lately diverting subject matter for a weapon. However, it has additionally documented previous Iranian concealment and failure to totally give an explanation for strains of undeclared nuclear subject matter at quite a lot of websites. The IAEA lately lacks complete verification capacity in Iran because of the removing of tracking apparatus right through the post-2018 escalation. Restoring this get admission to is a technical prerequisite for any deal. The elementary mistrust signifies that even a restored settlement shall be fragile, with all sides hyper-vigilant for indicators of dishonest.

Regional and International Dynamics

Several exterior actors will closely affect the talks:

• Israel: Deeply adverse to any deal that doesn’t completely dismantle Iran’s nuclear infrastructure and can most likely foyer the U.S. to handle most force. It might also take unilateral movements to sabotage negotiations or amenities.
• Russia and China: As JCPOA events and Iranian companions, they prefer a swift go back to the deal. They might protect Iran from new UN sanctions and supply financial lifelines, complicating U.S. leverage.
• European Allies (E3): Seek a diplomatic answer however are aligned with the U.S. at the want to cope with the missile and regional problems for a sustainable long-term association.
• Gulf States: Have blended perspectives. They concern a nuclear-armed Iran but in addition concern an Iranian backlash empowered through sanctions reduction. They will most likely urge all sides to succeed in a deal that guarantees regional balance.

Practical Advice: Understanding the Negotiation Outcomes

For observers, analysts, and buyers, the next frameworks are helpful for assessing the possible trajectories of those talks:

Scenario 1: Narrow Nuclear Deal Revival

What it seems like: A phased settlement the place Iran receives sanctions reduction in change for stepping again from its complex enrichment, lowering stockpiles, and restoring intrusive IAEA inspections. Talks on missiles and regional problems are postponed to a long run, undefined “2nd section.”

Likelihood: Moderate to excessive, because it represents the trail of least resistance and aligns with Iran’s said purple line.

Implications: Short-term de-escalation and oil value stabilization. However, it leaves core U.S. and Israeli issues unaddressed, making the deal inherently volatile. Future confrontations over missiles or proxies would most likely reignite nuclear tensions.

Scenario 2: Comprehensive “Broader” Agreement

What it seems like: A extra bold bundle linking nuclear restrictions to verifiable constraints on missile scaling and a cessation of reinforce for particular proxy actions. This will require extraordinary Iranian concessions.

Likelihood: Low, given the ideological and strategic significance of those techniques to the Iranian regime. Would require a elementary shift in Tehran’s danger belief.

Implications: A transformative, despite the fact that fragile, regional safety association. Would face fierce opposition from hardliners in each Iran and the U.S. Congress.

Scenario 3: Collapse of Talks and Renewed Escalation

What it seems like: Negotiations stall over the scope dispute. The U.S. maintains or will increase sanctions, whilst Iran additional advances its nuclear program. Miscalculations result in any other cycle of moves and counter-strikes, both planned or unintended.

Likelihood: Significant, because of the huge hole in positions and the presence of actors (like Israel) who might actively sabotage a deal.

Implications: Severe disruption to cross-border oil markets, larger chance of a much wider Middle East struggle, and doable acceleration of Iran’s nuclear threshold capacity.

FAQ: Common Questions About the Iran Nuclear Talks

Q1: What is the “nuclear threshold” and why is it essential?

A: The nuclear threshold is the purpose at which a state has the fissile subject matter (extremely enriched uranium) and technical wisdom to construct a nuclear weapon in a slightly quick time-frame (months), even supposing it has now not officially made up our minds to take action. Iran’s present stockpile of 60% enriched uranium is a key worry as a result of it’s over 90% of how to weapons-grade enrichment. The shorter this threshold, the fewer time the cross-border group has to reply if Iran comes to a decision to “escape” and weaponize. A deal goals to push this threshold again to over a yr.

Q2: What is the IAEA’s position and why is it important?

A: The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is the UN’s nuclear watchdog. Its position is to make sure that nuclear fabrics in a rustic aren’t being diverted to army use. In a revived JCPOA, Iran could be required to put into effect the IAEA’s Additional Protocol, giving inspectors steady, unannounced get admission to to all portions of its nuclear provide chain. Without complete, credible IAEA verification, any deal is unenforceable and non-credible to the cross-border group.

Q3: Can the U.S. President make a deal with out Congress?

A: The JCPOA used to be structured as an govt settlement, now not a treaty, to keep away from requiring Senate ratification (which would wish 67 votes). However, the 2015 Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act gave Congress the ability to study and vote to dam the lifting of sanctions. Any new deal would most likely face intense scrutiny and opposition within the present U.S. Congress, the place many lawmakers are deeply skeptical of Iran’s intentions. The President may re-impose sanctions by way of govt order if Iran violates the deal, however a long-lasting political answer would get pleasure from congressional reinforce.

This autumn: How do contemporary Iranian protests impact the negotiations?

A: The executive’s crackdown at the “Women, Life, Freedom” protest motion and next demonstrations signifies home instability and a focal point on inner safety. This might make the regime extra defiant in exterior negotiations to undertaking energy and harmony. Conversely, the U.S. bringing up human rights as a explanation why for doable army motion presentations that inner repression can gas exterior force. The regime most likely sees a nuclear deal and ensuing sanctions reduction so that you could bolster its financial environment and, through extension, its balance.

Conclusion

The resumption of U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations marks a pivotal, high-stakes second in Middle Eastern international relations. President Pezeshkian’s declaration that Iran is not going to yield to “over the top calls for” has crystallized the central, reputedly intractable dispute: the slim as opposed to huge scope of a possible settlement. While Iran seeks a simple, restricted change of nuclear constraints for sanctions reduction, the United States and its allies are pushing for a extra complete agreement that addresses Iran’s missile arsenal and regional actions. The technical feasibility of verification and the political feasibility of overcoming deep mutual mistrust would be the final determinants of founder or failure. The shadow of the 2025 escalation looms huge, serving as each a catalyst for talks and a reminder of the catastrophic prices of failure. The international watches to look if this diplomatic opening can bridge a chasm of a long time, or if it is going to turn out to be any other fleeting pause sooner than renewed war of words.