Russia plays key role in Iran-US nuclear talks, says government spokesperson
Iran said on Tuesday that Russia’s position as a permanent member of the UN Security Council and its involvement in nuclear cooperation with Tehran give it an important role in diplomatic efforts over Iran’s nuclear program.
“Russia’s role as a permanent Security Council member is important, and the nuclear cooperation between Iran and Russia naturally gives it a key part to play,” government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani said.
She added that Iran is encouraged by what it views as a constructive attitude from Washington, saying, “We are hopeful the good management we’re seeing from that side will help move things in a positive direction.”
An Iranian lawmaker has denied a New York Times report that Tehran proposed a joint venture to run its nuclear enrichment facilities as part of ongoing negotiations with the United States, adding that American negotiators have blocked Israeli influence from entering the talks.
“The claim about a joint nuclear investment between Iran and the United States is not true and has not been among the topics discussed in the negotiations,” Tehran-based Rouydad 24 website quoted Yaghoub Rezazadeh, secretary of the Iranian parliament’s national security and foreign policy committee, as saying in a interview.
“In the reports we received from the foreign ministry, this issue was never raised,” Rezazadeh added.
Rezazadeh added the United States has so far prevented Israeli objectives from influencing ongoing nuclear negotiations with Tehran.
“What we know for certain is that, so far, the American negotiating team has not allowed the objectives, views, or ideologies of the Zionist regime to enter the negotiations,” Rezazadeh said.
He also said that US President Donald Trump to Iran’s Supreme Leader had contained threats, adding that Tehran's response prompted the United States to back down. “Iran’s firm and appropriate response led them to retreat from the tone of that letter during the negotiations,” he said.
Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) is backing the country's negotiating team in ongoing nuclear talks with the United States, while the armed forces remain on high alert, a senior Iranian official said on Tuesday.
“Our armed forces have their fingers on the trigger and are ready to respond to any potential threat,” said Brigadier General Rasoul Sanayi-Rad, deputy political chief of the office of the Supreme Leader, according to Iranian media. “The field backs diplomacy.”
He added that the military, including the IRGC, supports Iran’s negotiators and reinforces their position at the table. “The IRGC backs the diplomacy team as a capacity of the system and keeps their hands full in the face of an adversary that recognizes our power,” he said.
Iran is urging members of the China-led Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) to strengthen legal cooperation in response to international sanctions affecting several member states, a senior official said during a visit to China on Tuesday.
Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, said judicial systems within the SCO can play a key role in holding sanctioning countries accountable through legal mechanisms.
“The issue of legal discussions related to unilateral sanctions is on the agenda,” Gharibabadi said, adding that the Iranian delegation is pursuing “a more coordinated and multilateral approach” within the SCO.
The SCO includes China, Russia, India, Pakistan, Iran, and several Central Asian countries.
The United States has positioned two aircraft carriers and a fleet of B-2 stealth bombers in the region near Iran, indicating potential military readiness amid ongoing nuclear negotiations, according to a Fox News opinion piece by Dr. Rebecca Grant, vice president of the Lexington Institute, a US-based think tank focused on defense and logistics.
“Two aircraft carriers and a fleet of B-2 stealth bombers are pointed straight at Iran,” Grant wrote. “Never before have we seen such a big forward deployment of B-2 bombers.”
She argued that a campaign to target Iran’s nuclear weapons program is “no longer far-fetched,” citing Israeli airstrikes in 2024 as having lowered the political and military risks of such an operation. “Frankly, the attacks on Iran’s air defenses carried out by Israeli F-35s and other planes last year have lowered the risk calculus,” she said.
Grant linked the deployment to President Donald Trump’s broader diplomatic strategy ahead of talks with Iran. “To keep the talks going, a big part of Trump’s strategy is to deploy to US Central Command the forces required to smash Iran’s nuclear weapons manufacturing capability,” she wrote.
The op-ed said that the United States can act unilaterally if needed. “The military calls this ‘sovereign options,’ because Trump needs no other country’s permission to launch strikes from aircraft carriers and bombers,” she said.
According to Grant, the deployment of six B-2 bombers to Diego Garcia—capable of delivering 30,000-lb. bunker-busting bombs—suggests planning for sustained precision strikes on Iran’s underground facilities.
As nuclear talks between Washington and Tehran edge forward, two former US officials warned the process is approaching a critical juncture—one that Iran may exploit to either extract deep concessions or run out the clock.
The gap between what the United States seeks and what Iran is willing to accept may simply be too wide to bridge, warned Christopher Ford, who served as Assistant Secretary for International Security and Nonproliferation during the Trump administration’s first term.
His remarks came at a panel hosted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, as momentum appears to be building toward renewed talks between Washington and Tehran over Iran’s nuclear program.
Host Andrea Mitchell with panel guests
Ford voiced deep skepticism about the direction of the negotiations and suggested Iran’s strategy may be to delay any meaningful outcome until after October, when UN Resolution 2231 is set to expire—removing the legal basis for snapback sanctions.
“If I were on the Iranian side, that would be my negotiating strategy piece number one: draw this out,” he said.
The panel, titled From JCPOA to TBD: Assessing the Prospects for Diplomacy with Iran, followed the abrupt cancellation of a separate virtual session that was to feature Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi.
Araghchi had been added to the speaker lineup on Saturday for Carnegie’s high-profile Nuclear Policy Conference. But on the morning of the event, the think tank announced the session had been canceled after the Iranian delegation allegedly demanded last-minute changes that would have barred both the moderator and audience from asking questions.
Ford pointed to the incident as a revealing example of how Iran approaches diplomacy.
“Carnegie has gotten a bit of a flavor of the Iranian negotiating style in the past 24 hours,” Ford said. “The disingenuous bait-and-switch kind of thing. He knew what he was doing, and I commend you all for standing, you know, sticking to your guns on this.”
Richard Nephew, who helped craft US sanctions against Iran during the Obama administration and is now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, echoed Ford’s concerns and called Iran’s current approach opportunistic.
“If you're Abbas Araghchi, you have to be trying to see what you can get and see whether or not you can get a concessional deal that puts you in a better position,” said Nephew, a former US negotiator.
He argued that Iran is probing for sanctions relief with minimal nuclear concessions—and may be encouraged by internal divisions within the Trump administration over whether a deal should be hardline or more flexible.
“Their actual entry point is to see what they can get… They get sanctions relief with fairly minimal nuclear concessions.”
Nephew added that public comments from US officials suggest openness to a significantly looser agreement.
“I think if you look at the plain text reading of what the president and what Witkoff have said, one can read into that a much looser, much, much softer deal,” he said.
While expressing doubt that a lasting agreement is within reach, Nephew suggested that a short-term deal could still help stabilize the situation if it limits nuclear activity and includes robust IAEA oversight.
Both experts portrayed the current moment as one of fragile, uncertain diplomacy—with high stakes and little room for error.
