1. Home
2. Middle East
3. Senior Official in Trump Administration Details Postmortem for Failed Iran Nuclear Talks

A senior U.S. official spoke to TIB in a background call on the Iran nuclear talks, providing an inside look into what happened during the negotiations.

Objectives of the U.S.-Iran Talks

The official outlined the Trump administration’s objectives for the U.S.-Iran talks in detail, focused primarily on the nuclear issue.

The first objective was to stop Iran from attaining a nuclear warhead, and remove ~10,000 kilograms of enriched nuclear material. Washington also demanded that Iran permanently close its nuclear facilities in Natanz, Fordow, and Isfahan.

The ~10,000 kilograms of enriched nuclear material consisted of $460 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium—near weapons-grade—1,000 kilograms at 20% enrichment, and 8,500 kilograms at 3.67% enrichment.

The official also stated that the U.S. sought to handle nuclear enrichment directly, with regional allies addressing the ballistic missile and proxies issues directly. The official noted that Iran never initiated talks on the latter two issues, which they stated was a key “tell” in the negotiations.

What Happened During the Talks?

The senior U.S. official outlined the components of the nuclear talks with Iran, drawing the conclusion that Iran was buying time and would retain enrichment capacity beyond Trump’s presidency. They assessed that an acceptable deal was not able to be achieved in an appropriate time frame, and deemed military action as necessary.

The official expressed that Iran “basically offered us political wins…but they were unwilling to give up the building blocks they needed to preserve in order to get a bomb.”

First Meeting: Iran insisted that it had an “inalienable right” to nuclear enrichment, and that it is an issue of “national right and pride.” Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi acknowledged that the stockpile of 60% enriched uranium was close to weapons-grade, and implied that the U.S. would be levied a large cost to receive it, which U.S. officials viewed as defiant and non-compromising.

Second Meeting: Iran promised that it would prepare a draft proposal on the nuclear issue within days, but none was delivered. U.S. officials interpreted this as a delay tactic.

Third Meeting: U.S. officials assessed that Iran sought a nuclear program for strategic—rather than civilian—use. The U.S. reportedly offered sanctions relief, free nuclear fuel indefinitely, and energy investment partnerships, which Iranian officials rejected. 

Iran presented a 5-7 page proposal covering their needs but reportedly refused to allow the U.S. to review it with experts, and would have allowed for enrichment levels 5-times higher than what was permitted under the Obama-era JCPOA agreement.

Officials stated that the proposal presented in Geneva had “some good ideas…but a lot of holes,” and joked that it was “like Swiss cheese.”

The U.S. official added that Washington believed that Iran was proposing “three months to a year” timelines to drag negotiations into a lengthened process. The Trump administration had interpreted that it would not achieve its ends in any short-term deal.

“Iran wasn’t negotiating to end its nuclear pathway. It was negotiating to protect it,” the official added. They said that if Iran maintained enriching capabilities, it could have accumulated up to 1,500 kilograms of weapons-grade uranium, enough for 40-50 bombs.

No Backchannel Talks with Iran

The U.S. official denied reports of backchannel talks with Iran since the first joint U.S.-Israeli strikes on Saturday. 

They stated that they had not contacted Iranian foreign minister Araghchi since the conflict “went kinetic,” and that the U.S. is not using intermediaries despite outreach from 10-12 countries.

The official expressed that “this is a military action, and it’s got to run its course.”