Iran nuclear talks expected to hinge on these 4 questions

DUBAI – The next round of US-Iran negotiations will seek to resolve perhaps the thorniest issue between the two sides: What should happen to Iran’s nuclear programme?

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly said that the primary motivation for starting the war with Iran was to prevent it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. For years, Iran has been amassing near-bomb-grade uranium, which the United States and Israel fear could be developed into a weapon.

The site where most of that material is believed to be stored was thought to have been heavily damaged in US-Israeli attacks in 2025. But without independent access to the area, the fate of the stockpile remains unclear.

For more than 50 years, Iran has insisted that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes only. But the US is demanding assurances that Iran cannot secretly develop a weapon.

Here are four key areas the talks are likely to focus on:

The process of enriching uranium transforms it from fuel that can be used for civilian purposes, like energy production, into a crucial component of a nuclear weapon.

To prevent that, the US is demanding that Iran suspend all uranium enrichment for at least 20 years. The Iranians have countered with offers of a 10-year halt.

In a phone call with The New York Times on June 14, Trump hinted that he might settle for a 15-year suspension, but did not want to negotiate via the news media. In the same call, he also suggested that Iran be limited to enriching at low levels “forever”.

Looming over the new talks is the deal struck by President Barack Obama in 2015 that negotiated a 15-year halt. Trump tore up that deal in his first term.

Vice-President J.D. Vance, who is leading the US negotiation, stated on June 18 that the US was seeking a complete moratorium on all uranium enrichment by Iran over the suspension period.

“The Obama deal allowed the Iranians to enrich uranium. This deal will not,” Vance told reporters.

Obama’s deal limited enrichment to 3.67 per cent, enough for research and medicine. Nuclear weapons typically require about 90 per cent enrichment.

After Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018, Iran steadily increased its stockpile of near-bomb-grade material until it had enough to build at least 10 bombs.

As at June 2025, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, believed Iran had about 440kg of uranium enriched to 60 per cent, in addition to roughly 11 tonnes of uranium enriched to other levels.

The US struck three key Iranian nuclear sites in 2025, including a complex outside Isfahan, where the UN agency said most of the near-bomb-grade material was stored. But with international inspectors barred from the site, the status of the enriched uranium is uncertain.

US officials are insisting that Iran dispose of its stockpiles completely. According to two US officials, the US is offering to work with the UN watchdog to dilute, or “downblend”, it to safe levels.

Another option would be for Iran to transfer the stockpile to another country, as it did with 98 per cent of the cache under the 2015 deal. Iran has not said publicly whether it would be willing to give up its entire stockpile.

The US has insisted that Iran dismantle its two enrichment plants at Natanz and Fordo, as well as its uranium storage tunnels at Isfahan. It is possible that Iran has additional nuclear sites the world does not know about.

Iran has baulked, insisting that that would amount to surrendering its “right to enrich”. It has argued that at least one site should remain, though that might prove difficult for US negotiators to stomach.

Under the Obama deal, Iran was permitted to keep facilities, as long as these were repurposed for civilian use. Critics of that deal say it meant Iran was able to quietly revive nuclear enrichment after the 2015 deal collapsed.

International inspectors have had no visibility into Iranian nuclear sites since the US-Israeli attacks in 2025 prompted Iran to block the UN agency’s access.

The Trump administration wants international inspectors to be able to conduct “snap” visits at any time and at any site in Iran. Rafael Grossi, head of the UN watchdog, said on June 18 that both Iran and the United States wanted his agency to have a role in verifying their agreement.

Resolving all of these questions within the 60-day negotiating timeline set out by the initial US-Iran deal will be a tall order, said Darya Dolzikova, an expert in nuclear weaponry at the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based research group.

The 60-day window is extendable by mutual consent and Trump said last week that it was not a “hard” deadline.

For one thing, Dolzikova said, the two sides would need to establish the current status of Iran’s nuclear programme and stockpile, an extensive exercise.

“If you’re going to start negotiating away parts of Iran’s programme and potentially even accepting certain elements of it,” she said, “then we need to have a sense of what they have now.”

“I don’t want to say it’s not possible,” she s, “but these are very complex issues, and 60 days is not a lot of time.” NYTIMES

• This article originally appeared in The New York Times.