US-Iran Nuclear Talks Resume Amid Protests and Tensions

Published: 23 February 2026. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

Fresh US-Iran nuclear talks are set to take place in Geneva this week, raising cautious hopes of diplomatic progress. Officials in Washington and Tehran have confirmed that negotiators will meet for another round of discussions focused on curbing Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium. The planned meeting signals that President Donald Trump believes Tehran may be ready to make meaningful concessions.

The new US-Iran nuclear talks come at a delicate moment for the region. Washington has recently redeployed significant military assets to the Middle East, fuelling fears of escalation. Yet both sides are publicly stressing the importance of diplomacy over confrontation. The atmosphere is tense, but officials suggest that real proposals are now on the table.

Iran’s foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi, indicated that there remains a genuine opportunity for a breakthrough. In an interview with CBS, he said negotiators could meet on Thursday to push forward what he described as a “fast deal”. His remarks reflected cautious optimism, though he paired them with a firm warning. If the United States were to attack Iran, he said, Tehran would consider itself entitled to respond in self-defence.

These dual messages capture the fragile balance surrounding the US-Iran nuclear talks. On one hand, there is recognition that prolonged confrontation carries enormous risks. On the other, mistrust continues to define the relationship between the two governments. Iranian officials remain wary that President Trump could reverse course abruptly, as he did in the past.

The memory of 2018 still looms large over these negotiations. During his first term, President Trump withdrew the United States from the 2015 nuclear agreement negotiated under Barack Obama. That landmark accord, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, had placed limits on Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief. Its collapse triggered years of rising tensions and incremental nuclear expansion by Tehran.

Now, President Trump faces the political challenge of shaping any new arrangement as stronger and more durable than the previous deal. His allies insist that Iran must demonstrate clearly that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapon. Critics, however, warn that maximalist demands could derail progress just as negotiations appear to gain momentum.

Over the weekend, Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, questioned why Tehran had not yet yielded under mounting US pressure. Speaking to Fox News, he suggested the president was puzzled by Iran’s resistance despite what he described as overwhelming American naval power in the region. His comments underscored the administration’s belief that leverage remains firmly on Washington’s side.

Iran’s position in the US-Iran nuclear talks is more nuanced. Officials argue that the country retains the right to enrich uranium for peaceful purposes under international law. They have proposed a strengthened verification regime overseen by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Under this framework, Iran would dilute its highly enriched uranium stockpile and grant inspectors full access to nuclear facilities that were previously damaged by strikes.

In exchange, Tehran expects substantial sanctions relief. Iranian negotiators insist that economic pressure has severely harmed ordinary citizens and undermined trust in diplomacy. They argue that meaningful incentives are essential if any agreement is to endure beyond the immediate political cycle.

Experts observing the US-Iran nuclear talks suggest a compromise may be emerging. Iran could retain the theoretical right to enrich uranium, but its practical capacity would be tightly restricted. Stockpiles would be capped at lower enrichment levels, and intrusive inspections would become routine. Such measures could extend the so-called “breakout time” required to produce weapons-grade material.

Yet diplomacy is unfolding against a backdrop of renewed domestic unrest inside Iran. Universities in Tehran and the north-eastern city of Mashhad reopened over the weekend for the first time since violent protests earlier this winter. Student demonstrations resumed almost immediately, with videos circulating online that appear to show clashes between protesters and members of the Basij militia.

The earlier wave of protests, which erupted in December and January, resulted in thousands of reported deaths. The Iranian government has stated that just over 3,000 people were killed. Human rights organisations, however, place the minimum figure closer to 6,000. The true toll remains uncertain, as independent investigations have been limited.

Tehran has declined to permit a United Nations fact-finding mission to enter the country. Officials insist that a domestic inquiry is sufficient to address allegations of excessive force. This week, Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Kazem Gharibabadi, is scheduled to address the United Nations Human Rights Council. Diplomats anticipate that several Western delegations may stage walkouts in protest.

The protests have also exposed internal political strains. President Masoud Pezeshkian, elected in 2024 with support from reformist groups, appears increasingly marginalised. Several prominent members of the Reformists Front coalition have been arrested or charged with supporting foreign interests. Although some have been released on bail, resentment within the movement is palpable.

Observers note that these domestic pressures could influence Tehran’s negotiating posture. A successful outcome in the US-Iran nuclear talks might ease economic hardship and strengthen moderates. Conversely, a breakdown in talks could embolden hardliners who argue that engagement with Washington yields only humiliation.

Within the United States, debate continues over the appropriate course. Some Republican figures have openly advocated military action against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. However, as negotiations advance, those calls appear to be losing momentum. Even critics of diplomacy recognise that a negotiated settlement would likely carry lower risks than direct conflict.

Regional actors are watching closely. Gulf states remain concerned about Iran’s missile programme and regional alliances, while Israel continues to warn that it will not tolerate a nuclear-armed Iran. The redeployment of US military assets has been interpreted by some analysts as both a deterrent and a signal of resolve during negotiations.

Despite the volatility, both governments appear to understand the stakes. A renewed confrontation could destabilise energy markets, disrupt global trade routes, and draw in regional powers. Diplomacy, however imperfect, offers a pathway to de-escalation. The coming days in Geneva may therefore prove pivotal.

Much will depend on whether negotiators can bridge gaps over enrichment limits and verification procedures. Trust is thin, but communication channels remain open. Each side is testing the other’s willingness to compromise without appearing weak domestically.

As the US-Iran nuclear talks resume, the world watches for signs of genuine progress. The interplay between internal unrest in Iran and strategic calculations in Washington adds layers of complexity. Yet history shows that even adversaries can reach agreements when interests align.

For now, cautious optimism coexists with deep scepticism. Diplomats hope that measured steps, rather than dramatic breakthroughs, will gradually rebuild confidence. Whether this round of talks leads to a durable settlement remains uncertain, but the alternative of renewed confrontation looms large over all involved.

Check our latest news