Iran-US Talks: Sovereignty Claims and Security Demands Collide in Geneva Nuclear Session

The second round of indirect Iran-US nuclear talks in Geneva on Tuesday illustrated with particular clarity the fundamental tension that has always defined these negotiations: Iran’s insistence on its sovereign right to enrich uranium versus Washington’s demand that Iran surrender precisely that right in exchange for sanctions relief. Despite this unresolved core dispute, both sides agreed on guiding principles and committed to exchanging draft texts.
Foreign Minister Araghchi, who led Tehran’s delegation, described the session as constructive and an improvement on the first round. He confirmed that the talks had produced an agreed framework of general principles and that both sides would meet again in approximately two weeks after exchanging written positions — a sign that neither party was prepared to walk away.
Iran’s sovereignty argument centers on its assertion that enriching uranium for civilian purposes is a right guaranteed by the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty — a right that Iran insists it will not trade away regardless of the pressure applied. Tehran offered to accept extensive oversight and verification, to dilute its near-weapons-grade uranium, and even to temporarily pause enrichment, but drew an absolute line at permanently surrendering the activity.
The US security argument is equally firm: given Iran’s track record and the pace at which it has advanced its enrichment programme, Washington argues that only a complete cessation of domestic enrichment — verified by the IAEA — can provide the assurance needed to justify lifting sanctions. The two positions appear, for now, irreconcilable.
Yet the talks continued, and both sides maintained enough restraint to agree on principles and procedures for the next round. This diplomatic persistence unfolded even as Khamenei threatened US warships and Iran conducted military exercises near the Strait of Hormuz — and even as Iran’s judicial system processed over 10,000 protest-related cases, many under conditions that raised serious human rights concerns.