The “Amwaj” website published a report highlighting the complex path of negotiations between the United States and Iran over the nuclear program prior to the outbreak of the current war, explaining how disagreements escalated as U.S. demands shifted while Iran maintained its position, before sudden military developments brought the diplomatic track to an end.
The report stated that key questions remain regarding the causes and objectives of the Israeli American war on Iran, three weeks after its outbreak.
U.S. officials claimed that Iran was approaching the capability to acquire a nuclear weapon, with chief negotiator Steve Witkoff accusing his Iranian counterparts of boasting about Tehran’s ability to produce nuclear arms.
Among the declared justifications for the war were alleged Iranian plans to launch a preemptive strike on Israel, which Washington argued would have drawn it into confrontation regardless.
The report cited multiple Arab and Iranian political and security sources indicating that the latest nuclear negotiations in February had seen notable progress before the military operation began.
Two regional parties, alongside Oman as mediator and host, played a significant role behind the scenes in pushing toward a peaceful resolution. After the outbreak of war, regional sources expressed deep concern over the sequence of events and fears about the difficulty of reaching a lasting solution.
Reviving Diplomacy
The report noted that Iran and the United States held five rounds of negotiations to resolve disputes over the future of Iran’s nuclear program, but these talks collapsed in June 2025 when Israel launched a surprise attack on Iran, joined by Washington, which struck three major nuclear sites before announcing a ceasefire.
According to the report, decision makers in Tehran believed that Trump used diplomacy as a cover, while avoiding direct involvement in war until risks were deemed limited.
Iran had refused for eight months to meet U.S. officials, considering negotiations futile after being attacked during talks, and rejected Trump’s demands, which it viewed as equivalent to full surrender.
However, both sides agreed in February to meet in Muscat to resolve a nuclear crisis that had persisted for more than two decades. While Oman played its traditional mediating role, Qatar emerged as a quiet but decisive actor.
On the eve of the Muscat talks, a Qatari delegation visited Tehran to facilitate agreement on the agenda. A senior Iranian political source confirmed that the United States accepted two key conditions: limiting negotiations to the nuclear file, excluding missiles and regional issues, and abandoning the demand for “zero enrichment” in favor of accepting a certain level of uranium enrichment within Iran.
A senior Iranian official noted that the first meeting between Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and the U.S. delegation involved frank discussions. Araghchi stated he had full authority to reach an agreement but stressed distrust in U.S. seriousness. Witkoff responded that he and Kushner were serious, hinting for the first time at acceptance of uranium enrichment in Iran.
One sensitive issue was Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60 percent, which Iran signaled readiness to reduce. Araghchi clarified that the stockpile amounted to 440.9 kilograms, theoretically sufficient for around ten bombs. While Witkoff viewed this as boasting or a threat, Iranian sources said it was intended to demonstrate the scale of concessions Tehran was willing to make.
Iranian political sources involved in the talks said the lack of technical expertise among Kushner and Witkoff caused frustration, as Araghchi had to repeatedly explain distinctions between enrichment facilities and reactors, while Witkoff mistakenly believed the Tehran research reactor was an enrichment site.
Sources indicated that Kushner introduced the idea of an “economic component” to any potential agreement, similar to discussions seen in Russia Ukraine negotiations.
Following the meeting, Witkoff described the session as highly positive and said he would seek Trump’s authorization to continue negotiations, which was granted the following day through intermediaries.
The Geneva Impasse
The report stated that Qatar proposed two ideas to Iran in early February after assessing the Oman talks: moving negotiations to Switzerland and involving UK National Security Adviser Jonathan Powell, given his technical knowledge of the nuclear issue and his relationship with Witkoff. Iran agreed to both proposals.
Powell arrived in Geneva on February 16, a day before the second round of talks. A second Iranian political source said Powell met both Araghchi and Witkoff, who expressed satisfaction with progress achieved in Oman.
However, at the start of the next round, the U.S. presented a new demand: dismantling the Fordow, Isfahan, and Natanz facilities that had been targeted by U.S. strikes, and building a surface level enrichment center. Iran rejected this, arguing it would make facilities more vulnerable to destruction.
The U.S. insisted the goal was to facilitate inspections, but Iran countered that inspection capabilities were not affected by whether facilities were above or below ground. To support this, the Iranian delegation brought in IAEA Director Rafael Grossi, who confirmed that inspections depend on access, not location, which angered Witkoff.
In response, Iran proposed a framework to prevent accumulation of enriched uranium, making weapon production impossible. The idea was to transfer enriched uranium directly to fuel fabrication plants to be converted into fuel plates and rods under full IAEA supervision.
In subsequent discussions, both sides agreed on six guiding principles: fuel production, preventing uranium accumulation, full inspections, sanctions relief, economic cooperation, and peaceful coexistence. They also agreed to draft an initial framework in the next meeting.
The Final Round of Talks
The report stated that Iranian and U.S. negotiators met again on February 26 in Switzerland. Prior to the meeting, intermediaries conveyed that Trump did not intend to launch another attack on Iran. However, amid increasing U.S. military buildup, Araghchi opened the session with a warning: “This may be our last meeting. If we fail today, you will return to attack and we will defend ourselves. No one will win, and then you will return to the table, and perhaps you will not find anyone to negotiate with.”
According to the first Iranian source, Kushner and Witkoff affirmed they came to Geneva to reach an agreement and were prepared to stay as long as needed. The Iranian side noted that both attended without technical experts. Unlike previous meetings, the session was described as long, serious, and focused on detailed issues.
At the U.S. request, Iran presented a detailed proposal including a timeline for implementation, addressing enrichment levels, reducing uranium concentration, the future of damaged facilities, future enrichment sites, renouncing nuclear weapons, and economic cooperation. In return, Iran demanded security guarantees, recognition of its right to peaceful nuclear energy, and lifting of sanctions.
The report added that Witkoff requested a five year halt to enrichment, to which Araghchi replied he could internally defend a three year suspension but would need to consult Tehran.
Iran interpreted U.S. implicit acceptance of fuel production for the Tehran research reactor as approval of enrichment at 20 percent.
However, in a subsequent session, Witkoff demanded a seven year freeze, later extending it to ten years after consulting Trump. This angered Araghchi, who accused the U.S. of constantly shifting negotiating terms. Sources said Araghchi was angered but did not shout, contrary to later claims.
Despite tensions, progress was achieved on other issues, and both sides agreed to leave unresolved matters to technical talks in Vienna. They also agreed that Oman’s foreign minister would announce that negotiations had achieved “tangible progress.”
Arab mediators expressed optimism and awaited the Vienna discussions, while Witkoff reassured them that no military attack was planned.
The Guardian reported that the British delegation was surprised by Iran’s proposals, viewing them as significant progress rather than a final offer.
The report concluded that less than 48 hours later, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei was killed in an Israeli strike on his residence in Tehran, along with senior military and security officials, triggering the full scale Israeli American war on Iran.
