The United States and Iran completed a third round of negotiations yesterday aimed at addressing the Iranian nuclear program, sources confirm, as heightened military activity in Bandar Abbas underscores the widening stakes of the diplomatic effort. The talks, held in a European city, were characterized by Iranian media as maintaining a positive atmosphere, though significant security and policy concerns remain unresolved.
Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stated following the meetings that ‘the only subject discussed was Iran’s nuclear program.’ This deliberate exclusion of the Islamic Republic’s expanding missile capabilities and its proxies across the Middle East—including Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Islamic Jihad—has been met with skepticism by the Israeli government and regional allies that view these issues as interrelated and inseparable from the nuclear file.
Diplomatic sources confirmed that neither side raised the subject of transferring enriched uranium already held by Iran to a third country for secure storage or removal. Such a measure has previously been regarded by international nuclear experts as a critical safeguard in preventing Iran from reaching a weapons threshold. Not discussing this point in detail has renewed concerns in Israel, which has long warned that partial deals risk emboldening Tehran while failing to dismantle its enrichment infrastructure.
The meetings included expert-level exchanges, which Araghchi described as useful, providing both parties with an opportunity to delve deeper into the technicalities of enrichment levels, centrifuge development, and monitoring arrangements under the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) framework. Yet, none of the breakthrough requirements laid out by Israel and other regional powers—particularly curbing Iran’s ballistic missile supply lines and operational networks headed by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC)—were placed on the table.
Regional Context: The Broader Iranian Threat
These negotiations take place against a volatile backdrop. Bandar Abbas, a critical military hub on Iran’s southern coast, has recently experienced significant IRGC deployments and military maneuvers, signaling Tehran’s resolve not only to advance its nuclear program but to consolidate its regional military posture. Israeli and American intelligence agree that these demonstrations of force are closely linked to the regime’s broader strategy of supporting and directing terror activity across the Middle East.
Iran’s regional conduct is deeply entwined with its nuclear ambitions. The IRGC continues to coordinate weapons shipments, training, and financial support to a network of terror organizations, many of which are explicitly dedicated to Israel’s destruction. These groups—including Hamas, responsible for the October 7th, 2023 massacre—the single most lethal antisemitic attack since the Holocaust—serve as proxies for Iranian power projection and are a central concern for Israeli security planners.
U.S. Approach: Limited Scope, Ongoing Risks
U.S. diplomats have defended the current focus on nuclear questions as a pragmatic attempt to contain the most urgent proliferation risks, while leaving the missile and proxy issues for potential later discussions. An official familiar with the talks noted that ‘progress in one area does not prevent parallel pressure in others,’ though Israeli analysts warn that such compartmentalization historically allows Tehran to exploit diplomatic gaps, expanding its missile arsenal and intensifying proxy warfare while nuclear negotiations continue.
The Trump administration’s 2018 decision to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement was partly driven by Iranian actions outside the nuclear sphere—especially its ballistic missile testing and attacks by Iranian-backed militias on U.S. and Israeli interests from Iraq to the Levant. Concerns in Jerusalem are amplified by provisions that could allow sanctions relief even without concrete restrictions on Iran’s conventional military or proxy activities.
Hostage Diplomacy and International Leverage
Iran continues to hold foreign nationals and dual citizens as leverage in its dealings with Western countries, part of a wider pattern of coercive diplomacy documented by human rights groups. This, combined with the regime’s ongoing enrichment activities and support for violent proxies, places additional pressure on global decision-makers to ensure any negotiated outcome includes strict, enforceable mechanisms—both nuclear and non-nuclear.
Israeli Policy: Indivisibility of the Iranian Threat
Israeli officials, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and IDF Chief of Staff Lieutenant General Eyal Zamir, have repeatedly insisted that any effective agreement must encompass the full spectrum of Iranian threats. Partial approaches, they caution, have historically led to cycles of escalation, leaving Israel and its allies exposed to Iranian surprise and aggression.
The Israeli government’s position is supported by mounting evidence of IRGC facilitation of terror operations, including arms transfers to Gaza, missile stockpiling in Lebanon, and direct attacks on Israeli and allied targets. The October 7th massacre, in particular, marked a strategic watershed that redefined Israeli red lines: never again can agreements neglect the linkage between nuclear, missile, and terror threats posed by Tehran and its affiliates.
Diplomatic Outlook and Strategic Choices
Though both the U.S. and Iran confirmed their willingness to continue talks, the absence of any significant progress on missiles, proxies, or enriched material highlights the enduring obstacles to a comprehensive resolution. While technical discussions have created frameworks for potential verification, the broader regional risk calculus has shifted—with Iran’s adversaries on high alert and its proxies remaining active on multiple fronts.
In summary, the third round of U.S.-Iran nuclear negotiations underscores the chasm between diplomatic aspirations and security realities. The compartmentalization of talks may serve tactical goals in the short term, but without confronting the IRGC’s role in regional warfare and Iran’s continued missile expansion, long-term stability remains elusive for Israel and its regional partners.
