Negotiators face huge task to close gaps in rival Iran peace proposals

Negotiators Face Mounting Pressure to Resolve Disputes Over Iran’s Peace Offers

As the clock ticked down toward a self-set deadline, US President Donald Trump declared a two-week ceasefire to halt the ongoing conflict. The agreement came amidst a dire threat to erase Iran’s “civilisation” entirely, a stark contrast to the optimism surrounding the truce. Pakistan, acting as the mediator, is expected to convene talks in Islamabad, potentially beginning as soon as Friday. Despite this progress, significant discrepancies remain between the two nations’ proposals, complicating the path to a lasting resolution.

The core of the negotiation lies in determining the foundation of the discussions. In a post on Truth Social, Trump highlighted that Iran had submitted a 10-point plan, which he deemed a “practical starting point for talks.” Meanwhile, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi referenced the US’s 15-point proposal as a potential framework for ending hostilities. Yet, neither plan has been officially released, even though leaked versions have circulated widely, appearing to diverge sharply in their objectives.

Adding to the ambiguity, the White House has dismissed the Iranian proposal in the media as not representing the “operational blueprint” shared with US officials. “Numerous specifics are still unclear,” said Anwar Gargash, the UAE president’s top diplomatic advisor, during an interview with the BBC. “The statements from Iran, Washington, and the Pakistani mediator differ, so we must align these details to grasp the direction of the negotiations.”

Key Concerns in the Conflict

A central issue remains the accusation that Iran is rapidly advancing its nuclear capabilities. This claim has long been the cornerstone of Washington’s case for war, even as Tehran has consistently denied such allegations. American officials argue that sufficient damage has already been inflicted since the 12-day war last year and the recent US-Israeli strikes, ensuring Iran cannot quickly revive a dangerous nuclear program.

However, the fate of 440kg of highly enriched uranium—still held by Iran—remains unresolved. Trump often refers to this material as “dust,” claiming it is entombed under the wreckage of the Nuclear Technology/Research Centre in Isfahan, following the site’s devastating bombardment. US Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth affirmed, “Their dust is buried deep and under constant surveillance. There will be no Iranian nuclear weapons. Not a chance.”

Conflicting Demands and Diplomatic Shifts

Iran insists that any agreement must recognise its right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes, as outlined in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Before the war erupted, Oman played a mediating role between the two sides. Now, with tensions high, the question persists: will the US consent to any form of enrichment?

According to reports, Trump’s 15-point plan demands Iran dismantle major nuclear facilities, cease uranium enrichment on its territory, and export stockpiles. It also calls for unrestricted international inspections. Yet, when pressed for confirmation, Hegseth offered a more cautious response: “Iran will never possess a nuclear weapon or the capacity to develop one.”

Another focal point is Iran’s ballistic missile program, which Washington views as a critical threat. The 15-point proposal explicitly requires Iran to pause missile development, halt production of long-range systems, and cease drone exports to Middle Eastern allies. The Pentagon asserts that much of this threat has been neutralised, citing the destruction of 80% of Iran’s missile facilities, 80% of its air defenses, and 90% of its weapons manufacturing plants. Iran, however, has historically resisted ceding control over its missile capabilities, leaving the outcome uncertain.

The situation took a notable turn with Iran’s apparent readiness to reopen the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime route. This development may alleviate recent economic pressures on global trade, though its long-term implications remain to be seen. As negotiations continue, the balance of power and the fate of the proposals hang in the air, awaiting clarity from both sides.