New Delhi, Apr 14: Iran was willing to suspend its uranium enrichment programme for up to five years, but the United States rejected the offer, insisting on a much longer 20-year halt, according to a report by The New York Times cited by the BBC that led to the failed first round of talks between Iran and US.
The report, quoting senior Iranian and US officials, said both sides exchanged proposals during recent talks held in Pakistan, but remained “far apart” on key terms, particularly over the duration and verification of limits on Tehran’s nuclear activities.
Despite the differences, the discussions have kept diplomatic channels open, with indications that a second round of face-to-face talks could take place soon. The BBC reported that these exchanges suggest there may still be a pathway towards a broader peace deal, even as core disagreements persist. The White House has not publicly commented on the report.
Iran’s nuclear programme continues to be a central sticking point in the conflict. US President Donald Trump reiterated over the weekend that Washington would ensure Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapon, underscoring the administration’s hardline position.
Meanwhile, US Vice-President JD Vance sharply criticised Tehran’s actions in the Strait of Hormuz, accusing Iran of engaging in “an act of economic terrorism” by disrupting maritime traffic through the strategic waterway.
Speaking to Fox News, Vance said the US was prepared to respond in kind. “If the Iranians engage in economic terrorism, the United States will ensure that no Iranian ships are getting out either,” he said, signalling support for the ongoing US naval blockade.
Vance, however, struck a more measured tone on diplomacy, noting that “a lot of progress was made” during the weekend talks. “The ball is in Iran’s court,” he said, adding that Tehran would need to show flexibility and accept key US demands, including international control over its enriched uranium stockpile and a robust verification mechanism to prevent weaponisation.
The latest developments highlight a widening gap between public rhetoric and behind-the-scenes diplomacy. While both sides continue to escalate pressure, militarily and economically, ongoing negotiations suggest neither is ready to abandon the possibility of a negotiated settlement.
