After Iran declaring U.S. as their enemy, now their officials mentions about Nuclear Compromises as U.S. Talks Resume in Geneva Amid Deep Mistrust and Military Tensions

 Iran's officials mentions about Nuclear Compromises as U.S. Talks Resume in Geneva Amid Deep Mistrust and Military Tensions

In a notable shift in tone from Tehran, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi has publicly stated that his country is prepared to discuss meaningful limitations on its nuclear activities including diluting its stockpile of 60% enriched uranium if the United States demonstrates genuine willingness to lift crippling economic sanctions. The remarks, delivered in a rare interview conducted inside Tehran and broadcast by the BBC on February 15, 2026, come just days before a second round of indirect high-level negotiations between the two longtime adversaries is scheduled to open in Geneva on Tuesday.

“The ball is in America’s court to prove that they want to do a deal,” Takht-Ravanchi told BBC chief international correspondent Lyse Doucet. “If they are sincere, I’m sure we will be on the road to an agreement.” He framed the offer to dilute highly enriched uranium material that has brought Iran perilously close to weapons-grade levels as concrete evidence of Iranian flexibility, while insisting that any final accord must deliver tangible economic relief for both sides.

After saying bad about US and saying US is their enemy, on what basis they decided this even?

The comments mark the clearest signal yet from Tehran that it is willing to step back from some of its most advanced nuclear achievements in exchange for sanctions relief that has long been its central demand. Yet Takht-Ravanchi was equally firm on red lines: Iran will not accept any demand for “zero enrichment” on its soil, a position Washington has repeatedly described as essential to prevent a future dash toward a bomb.

“We are ready to discuss this and other issues related to our programme if they are ready to talk about sanctions,” he said. On the question of shipping Iran’s more than 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium out of the country a step Tehran took under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) — he replied that it was “too early to say what will happen in the course of negotiations.”

A Fragile Diplomatic Window After Years of Confrontation

The renewed talks represent the most serious attempt in years to resolve the nuclear standoff that has defined U.S.-Iran relations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. The current round began with indirect discussions in Muscat, Oman, on February 6, described by both sides as a “good start” but still preliminary. Oman, long a trusted backchannel, is once again mediating, with additional support from Qatar and other regional actors.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi left Tehran on Sunday leading a diplomatic and technical delegation to Geneva, where he is also expected to meet Swiss and Omani counterparts as well as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi. A U.S. delegation that includes Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and senior advisor Jared Kushner is en route for the Tuesday session.

The atmosphere, however, remains heavy with skepticism and the shadow of recent violence. In June 2025, Israel launched airstrikes on Iranian nuclear sites, triggering what became known as the 12-day war. The United States joined subsequent strikes on facilities at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Talks were suspended, and trust plummeted. Iran accuses Israel of deliberately sabotaging diplomacy; Washington and its allies point to Iran’s rapid advances in enrichment and its support for regional militias as the real obstacles.

Economic Incentives and Broader “Win-Win” Vision

Beyond the nuclear file, Iranian officials are floating the idea of a more comprehensive economic partnership. A senior foreign ministry official told Iran’s Fars news agency that any durable agreement should include mutual benefits in oil and gas fields, joint mining investments, and even aircraft purchases areas where American companies could see “high and quick economic returns.”

“For the sake of an agreement’s durability, it is essential that the U.S. also benefits,” said Hamid Ghanbari, deputy director for economic diplomacy. The message appears aimed at addressing a long-standing Iranian complaint that the 2015 deal never delivered the promised economic windfall, partly because the Trump administration withdrew from it in 2018 and reimposed “maximum pressure” sanctions.

Iran’s economy has been battered by years of isolation: inflation remains stubborn, the rial has lost much of its value, and oil exports overwhelmingly to China are under fresh U.S. pressure following recent agreements between President Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to curb Tehran’s sales to Beijing.

U.S. Stance: Preference for Diplomacy, but “Very Hard to Do”

On the American side, the message has been cautiously optimistic yet realistic. Speaking in Bratislava on Saturday, Secretary of State Marco Rubio said President Trump “would prefer to do a deal” but acknowledged the difficulty.

“No one’s ever been able to do a successful deal with Iran but we’re going to try,” Rubio said. He confirmed that Witkoff and Kushner were traveling for the Geneva meetings, signaling high-level White House interest.

At the same time, the U.S. has not softened its broader demands. Rubio and other officials have repeatedly said any agreement must address Iran’s ballistic missile program and its support for proxy groups across the Middle East issues Tehran insists are non-negotiable and unrelated to the nuclear file. Washington also continues to criticize Iran’s handling of recent nationwide protests, which human rights groups say were met with lethal force.

The Pentagon has dispatched a second aircraft carrier to the region and is preparing contingency plans for sustained military action should diplomacy collapse. More than 40,000 U.S. troops are now deployed across the Middle East, a posture Takht-Ravanchi described as potentially turning any conflict into “a different game” with unpredictable regional consequences.

Persistent Sticking Points and the Shadow of Mistrust

Several core disputes remain unresolved. Iran insists its right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes is enshrined in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and will not be surrendered. Trump, as recently as last week, reiterated that “we don’t want any enrichment.” Tehran also flatly refuses to put its missile arsenal or regional alliances on the negotiating table, calling the weapons “defensive capabilities” that proved vital during last year’s conflict.

Domestic politics on both sides add further complexity. Hardliners in Tehran view any concession as weakness, while in Washington, influential voices including Israel argue that only a deal covering missiles, proxies and human rights can be sustainable. The presence of Jared Kushner at recent talks has been interpreted in Tehran as a positive sign of serious U.S. engagement, yet Iranian officials remain wary of shifting American positions between rounds.

What Comes Next?

The Geneva session will be an early test of whether the latest diplomatic opening can survive the weight of history. Analysts are divided. Some see the Iranian offer on 60% uranium as a genuine olive branch that could buy time and breathing room for both economies. Others warn that deep mutual distrust, unresolved regional conflicts, and the looming threat of military escalation make a breakthrough unlikely in the short term.

For ordinary Iranians, the stakes could not be higher. Sanctions have eroded living standards for years; a successful deal could unlock frozen assets, revive oil revenue and ease daily hardships. For the region, a nuclear agreement however limited might reduce the risk of another devastating war that could draw in multiple powers and send oil prices soaring.

As delegations converge on Geneva, the message from Tehran is one of cautious hope tempered by resolve. “We will do our best,” Takht-Ravanchi said, “but the other side also has to prove that they are also sincere.”

Whether the coming days produce concrete progress or simply another chapter in a decades-long standoff will depend on whether both capitals can move beyond rhetoric and begin the painstaking work of compromise. For now, the ball as the Iranian deputy minister put it remains squarely in Washington’s court.