by Alastair Crooke, Strategic Culture:
Thursday’s diplomatic negotiations (26 Feb) – for all the panglossian noise from mediators and negotiators – confirmed the essential impasse. The U.S. demands presented to Iran were:
- The complete dismantling of the Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan nuclear sites.
- The transfer all enriched uranium to the United States.
- The ending of all sunset clauses, and permanent restrictions.
- The Acceptance of Zero Enrichment – with only the Tehran Research Reactor allowed to remain.
- Minimal sanctions relief upfront; further relief only after full compliance.
TRUTH LIVES on at https://sgtreport.tv/
These demands plainly were formulated to obstruct, rather than facilitate, any diplomatic solution. It reflects a strategy rooted in the viscerally-held presumption of Iranian weakness that, in the face of a U.S. military show of force, was confidently anticipated would surely yield to Iranian capitulation. That hypothesis always was hubristic. It has proved manifestly false as predictably, Tehran rejected the U.S.’ demands:
- [Iran] insisted on recognition of its right (under the NPT) to enrich uranium for civilian needs.
- Rejected ‘zero enrichment’.
- Refused to transfer Iranian enriched uranium from its territory.
- Insisted that any agreement must both include recognition of its right to enrich – and a significant lifting of sanctions. Iran rejects the notion of indefinite restrictions placed upon it.
The mood music at the end of the talks was determinedly upbeat. Iran’s lead negotiator FM Araghchi said: “Today’s round was the best among the rounds so far. We clearly presented our demands”. The Iranian side wanted to make clear for both domestic and overseas audiences that they (at least) had negotiated in earnest.
Reports from the U.S. however, suggest that the decision to attack was already made during the 29 December 2025 Mar-a-Lago summit, between Netanyahu and Trump.
The Iranian leadership well understood that any concessions that Iran might reasonably have offered in the talks would not have given Trump his desired quick political ‘win’. The more so, as Iran insisted that missile defences were non-negotiable.
Whilst placing Iran’s nuclear program at the centre of the talks, U.S. Secretary of State Rubio – ahead of this (last) round of negotiations – nonetheless underlined that from Washington’s perspective, the threat of Iran’s ballistic missiles to be “a fundamental component that cannot be ignored”.
Read More @ Strategic-Culture.org
