Washington’s swift reaction to the Iranian text, which was delivered just before 3 a.m. Friday Tehran time, was in direct contrast to Tehran’s claims that its proposals presented “a constructive approach” aimed at “completing negotiations ». Only minutes after Iran’s proposals were received by the EU and forwarded to Washington, the Biden administration gave a tentative, but sharp, thumbs up. “We can confirm that we have received Iran’s response through the EU,” a State Department spokesman said. “We are studying it and we will respond through the EU, but unfortunately it is not constructive.” An unnamed U.S. official was quoted as telling Politico: “Based on their response, it looks like we’re moving backwards.” It is unclear what was contained in the Iranian text that was the latest round of exchanges with Washington aimed at amending a draft deal presented by the EU on August 8. Iran gave its first response to the draft on August 15, which was followed by a response from the US. The latest Iranian document was, in turn, a response to the US text. Officials on both sides were cautiously optimistic about the possibility of converging on a final deal that would revive a 2015 nuclear deal in which Iran accepted tight restrictions on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. That agreement has been severely eroded since Donald Trump withdrew US participation in 2018 and reinstated sanctions. Last week, US national security spokesman John Kirby welcomed what he called Iran’s concessions and on Wednesday this week said the White House remained “hopeful” that a deal would be reached. Earlier Friday in Tehran, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanani said Iran’s latest text presented “a constructive approach aimed at concluding negotiations.” French President Emmanuel Macron also struck an optimistic note on Wednesday in a speech to French diplomats in Paris, saying he hoped a new deal could be agreed “in the coming days”. But Ali Alizadeh, a member of Iran’s parliament’s security committee, played down that optimism, warning that the US position was not in line with the EU draft, saying it had dashed earlier hopes that a deal was days away. Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said Iran needed even stronger guarantees that the lifting of US sanctions would have a practical impact and could not be imposed directly by future US administrations. “Regarding guarantees, we need a stronger text,” the minister said in Moscow at a press conference with his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov. Joe Biden has said he can guarantee US compliance with the deal under his presidency, but not by future administrations — effectively giving Iran only a two-year guarantee of sanctions relief. Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you to the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online advertising and content sponsored by external parties. For more information, see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and Google’s Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply. The US has tried to placate Tehran by promising that any trade or investment deals signed before a future US administration withdraws from the deal would be legally immune from US sanctions for up to five years. Iran is also seeking guarantees that until the deal is fully in force, the West will completely halt its three-year investigation into unexplained nuclear particles found at nuclear facilities before 2003. The EU has suggested that the investigation can be stopped as long as reliable explanations are provided. Iran fears that the continued existence of the investigation could be used as a pretext to maintain or reimpose sanctions. Russia’s envoy to the nuclear talks in Vienna, Mikhail Ulyanov, urged the West to back off, saying: “There are no current illegal activities taking place there.” One of the most difficult issues was how to handle Iran’s advanced centrifuges and the surplus stockpile of uranium enriched by the Iranians in violation of the original deal. The West wanted the destruction of these centrifuges or their removal from Iran, but Iran only wants to dismantle and store these devices in Iran. Iran argues that storing the centrifuges in a building overseen by the IAEA will act as a sword of Damocles and serve as a guarantee that the US will abide by the deal. US Republicans also want guarantees that surplus enriched uranium will not be sent to Russia without UN oversight. Israeli officials say the deal clears a path for an Iranian nuclear weapon by allowing it to begin operating advanced centrifuges by 2026 and then enrich more uranium to higher levels by 2031. But supporters of the deal say the alternative, no deal – is worse, and these end dates can be extended during negotiations.
