May 28, 2025

SHARE |

U.S.-Iran Talks Inconclusive After Five Rounds

AP Photo/Vahid Salemi

By all accounts, Saturday’s fifth round of nuclear talks between the U.S. and Iran, in Rome, registered limited progress. The meeting apparently did not address, let alone try to resolve, the core question still dividing the two sides: whether a new agreement would provide for Iran to continue enriching uranium. Ahead of the meeting, Iranian officials told CNN the talks seem unlikely to lead to an agreement because the U.S. continues to insist on “zero enrichment” – a requirement Tehran declares non-negotiable. Some Iranian officials told journalists the Trump team is “steering discussions toward a deadlock,” adding that “the position of the U.S. is making the talks unproductive and formal meetings are unlikely to continue much longer.”

Despite the pessimism, the participants deny that the talks have reached an impasse. U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated, after their Saturday meeting, that they would meet again, although no date for another round has been announced. In his readout of the latest session, Araghchi stated: “The negotiations are too complicated to be resolved in two or three meetings,” adding there was “potential for progress” based on proposals offered by Omani mediators. Also summarizing the Saturday meeting, Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi said “some, but not conclusive, progress” was made, adding: “We hope to clarify the remaining issues in the coming days to allow us to proceed toward the common goal of reaching a sustainable and honorable agreement.” A senior Trump official characterized the talks as “constructive,” adding, “we made further progress…but there is still work to be done.”

Confirming that key issues were not resolved, other Iranian officials indicated the talks on Saturday were intended “solely to gauge Washington’s latest stance rather than pursue a potential breakthrough,” according to press accounts. On Sunday, President Trump suggested more progress might have been made, indicating he might have an announcement in the coming days, saying “…I have a feeling I might be telling you something good.” Trump’s comments contrasted with those of the participants, leaving it unclear what progress he might have been referring to.

The participant readouts of the Saturday meeting suggest the two sides might sidestep the “zero enrichment” issue by forging an interim accord. A stopgap deal – apparently suggested by Oman – presumably would build confidence and lay the groundwork for a later permanent agreement. One unnamed U.S official told journalists an interim agreement would enable Iran to demonstrate its willingness to permanently abandon the pursuit of nuclear weapons, while achieving a reprieve from U.S. imposition of any new sanctions. Some press reports detailed the proposal as providing for Iran to freeze its enrichment of uranium for a period of three years, in exchange for a “partial” removal of U.S. sanctions. Another widely discussed potential U.S. concession envisions Trump requesting that U.S. partners in Europe refrain from invoking a “snap-back” of U.N. sanctions that were lifted to implement the 2015 multilateral Iran nuclear deal, which Trump exited in his first term. European leaders are expected to discuss invoking the snapback provision, which expires in October, at the following International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors meeting, scheduled for the coming weeks. During this meeting, Iran’s nuclear advances will be presented and discussed. Still, suggesting the inherent complexity of even reaching an interim agreement, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei dismissed media reports, on Monday, that a provisional agreement was being considered at all. And referring to an enrichment “freeze proposal,” Baghaei told journalists: "Iran will never accept that."

Even as it expresses willingness to ease economic pressure on Iran if an accord is reached, Trump’s team has continued to pressure Iran economically to build additional leverage in the negotiations process. As part of Trump’s “maximum pressure” strategy, intended to force Iranian concessions at the bargaining table, the Trump team has sanctioned dozens of foreign companies for its transactions with Iran. The most noteworthy among them have been several Chinese “teapot refineries” that purchase Iranian crude oil. In the aggregate, Chinese energy firms buy more than 1.5 million barrels of Iranian crude oil per day – transactions that help Iran stave off economic collapse. On Wednesday, in advance of the Rome meeting, the U.S. State Department sanctioned Iran’s construction sector as being “controlled directly or indirectly” by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The determination imposes penalties on any foreign firm that provides raw and semi-finished metals, graphite, coal, and software for integrating industrial purposes to the Iranian industry. The State Department also imposed penalties on any entity determined to have provided Iran with any of the 10 strategic materials, including the volatile chemical sodium perchlorate, that it said Iran is using in its nuclear, military, or ballistic missile programs. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said: “With these determinations, the United States has broader sanctions authorities to prevent Iran from acquiring strategic materials for its construction sector under IRGC control and its proliferation programs.”

Trump officials have also sought to impress upon their Iranian counterparts that a refusal to compromise will present Iran with serious adverse consequences. Trump and his team have repeatedly reiterated, including during Trump’s mid-May visit to several Arab Gulf states, that, while preferring a negotiated settlement, he intends to use force to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities if no deal is reached. Messaging that Trump will not abide by an Iranian effort to extend the talks indefinitely, as U.S. officials sense urgency in reaching an agreement, the Trump team released a new intelligence report suggesting Iran could construct a nuclear device on short order, were its leaders to decide to do so. The U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency said in its report: “Iran almost certainly is not producing nuclear weapons, but Iran has undertaken activities in recent years that better position it to produce them, if it chooses to do so…These actions reduce the time required to produce sufficient weapons-grade uranium for a first nuclear device to probably less than one week.”

Trump’s aides have also warned Iran that, even if Trump wants to avoid sparking a new Middle East war, U.S. ally Israel will not be satisfied with any agreement that fails to verifiably and permanently prevent Iran from developing a nuclear device. In what appeared to be a deliberate U.S. leak, four days before the Rome talks, CNN cited “multiple U.S. officials familiar with the latest intelligence” as telling the network U.S. intelligence detected Israeli preparations to strike Iranian nuclear facilities. Among the military preparations, the U.S. reportedly observed the movement of air munitions and the completion of an air exercise. The CNN report indicated Israel’s primary intent is to influence the U.S.-Iran talks by convincing Tehran it will face military action – even if not necessarily undertaken by the U.S. – unless it agrees to abandon uranium enrichment entirely.

The U.S. officials who commented to CNN reportedly cautioned that Israeli leaders apparently have not made a final decision to strike, and they noted that U.S. officials differ about the likelihood that Israel will ultimately act. On Thursday, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Mike Huckabee, publicly confirmed the CNN report, saying: “We certainly are aware of what the Israelis are at least preparing for. But it’s not that they have made a firm decision. I think they recognize they face an existential threat from Iran.” He added that, even though such a strike would upend the U.S. talks with Iran, “I can’t imagine the US would object to a sovereign nation defending itself against what they perceive as a legitimate threat to their very lives.” Israel has long characterized a nuclear-armed Iran as an “existential threat.” Suggesting Trump’s team believes that openly discussing the potential for an Israeli strike can benefit Witkoff’s negotiations, U.S. sources noted that Israel is likely to strike if a U.S.-Iran agreement does not provide for “zero enrichment.” Other U.S. sources suggested Israel might strike immediately after U.S.-Iran talks collapse, were that to occur.

However, military action, whether conducted by the U.S. or Israel, might permanently foreclose the diplomatic pathway to prevent a nuclear Iran. A wide range of experts assess that Tehran would likely implement its threats to respond to military action by withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and expelling all IAEA inspectors, closing a key window into Iran’s nuclear activities. An abrogation of the NPT would, in the view of many experts, indicate that Tehran had decided to proceed to develop working nuclear weaponry. That decision, if finalized, is almost certain to spark major warfare in the Middle East.