Iran’s ex-security chief sets nine conditions for Rome talks

The report published on Thursday said that Iran offered to temporarily reduce the level of its uranium enrichment in exchange for significant sanctions relief, including permission to export oil, as the first phase of an agreement with the United States. Later phases would involve Tehran making a “permanent” pledge not to enrich uranium beyond the 3.67% limit set by the Obama-era JCPOA. The arrangement would also include Iran shipping out highly enriched uranium to a third country in exchange for further sanctions relief, including the lifting of longstanding US sanctions.

The sources told Iran International that Witkoff’s positive response to the Iranian proposal surprised their delegation in Muscat.

What the diplomats did not clarify is the fate of roughly 17,000 uranium enrichment machines, known as centrifuges—arguably the most critical component of Iran’s current nuclear program. These are the machines capable of refining uranium to weapons-grade levels of 90%.

Under the JCPOA agreement, Iran was allowed to keep 5,000 machines in operation for ten years, with roughly 7,500 centrifuges kept in storage. That limitation that Tehran has already violated would end in 2025.

Since the US withdrew from the JCPOA, Iran has significantly increased its number of centrifuges in operation and deployed more advanced models with higher output. If Tehran is allowed to retain a substantial portion of this infrastructure, it could resume higher-level enrichment at any time.

The Arms Control Association said in 2022 that, “Several of Iran’s escalatory breaches have resulted in its acquisition of new knowledge and expertise that cannot be reversed.”

The Islamic Republic urgently needs sanctions relief, as its economy is in deep crisis and the national currency has lost nearly half its value since September. If the United States lifts some sanctions and unfreezes assets in exchange for only a temporary reduction in enrichment, Tehran will feel less pressure to move quickly toward further phases of the proposed agreement.

This could allow Iran to stall for time—as it did during the Biden administration—until President Trump nears the end of his term and the 2028 election campaign begins. This may explain why Tehran, according to the report, has prioritized the lifting of oil export sanctions in the first phase.

Iran has consistently insisted that the US must “show good faith” in any negotiation. This has typically meant lifting at least some of the sanctions reimposed by President Trump in 2018. Tehran has also called for an end to US “pressure,” a demand that could reduce Washington’s leverage in protracted talks if sanctions are eased too early.

Iran began enriching uranium to 60 percent in 2021 following a December 2020 parliament decision to retaliate against the US. Interestingly, for more than two years Iran waited during the first Trump term before taking any drastic retaliatory step and only upped the ante after President Joe Biden’s election. Until then, enrichment levels had remained below 5 percent.

If Iran retains its centrifuge infrastructure, it remains capable of resuming high-level enrichment—as it has done since 2021. One of the core criticisms of the JCPOA is that it never fully banned enrichment, and many of its key restrictions are now approaching expiration.

On the diplomatic and economic fronts, a partial or phased agreement would allow Iran to build closer ties with countries such as India, and trade more freely with China and Europe. That would reduce the urgency currently driving Iran’s negotiations—and could complicate US efforts to pursue a phased deal in a meaningful way.

“It is ideology, flexible ideology. Extremist, but flexible,” Alizadeh said. “Using lies, creating lies—that’s part of their strategy.”

Alizadeh, who served in Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for 22 years, said Tehran’s current posture is motivated by a desire to stay afloat amid both internal unrest and external pressure.

Despite having defected, Alizadeh says he remains in contact with individuals inside Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and remains familiar with official policy thinking.

He offered insight into the mindset of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, calling him a revolutionary who clings to the vision of his predecessor, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, to export the Islamic Revolution.

“The reality is dictating to Khamenei that in this situation—internally because of the economic problems inside Iran, and tension with many parts of the world, particularly with Israel and the United States, and now with the European Union,” he said.

According to Alizadeh, pressure is mounting: Israel’s strikes on Iran’s regional proxies, economic hardship, domestic dissent, and the looming threat of “snapback” sanctions from the E3 (Britain, France, and Germany) are all pushing Tehran toward tactical concessions.

Despite its defiant stance, he said, Iran will most likely cave to US demands—but only temporarily.

Flipping his lights on and off, Alizadeh emphasized: “The nuclear program is like this: switch on. Switch off."

Iran permits nuclear inspectors into the country, he added, but blocks human rights monitors because Tehran can pause nuclear activities but cannot hide rights abuses.

Alizadeh served as a diplomat in Finland during the 2009 contested elections, when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s declared victory sparked mass protests.

Supporters of opposition candidate Mir Hossein Mousavi claimed the vote was rigged, leading to a nationwide crackdown.

That moment, Alizadeh said, shattered his lifelong beliefs.

“When the Green Movement erupted in Iran was a moment that I always describe it as rebirth for myself,” he said.

Alizadeh pointed to the lack of public outrage from Iran’s hardliners in the face of renewed diplomacy—even with President Donald Trump whom the detest for ordering the killing of military leader Qasem Soleimani and withdrew from an earlier nuclear deal during his first term.

“Trump is in office—the Trump who killed Qasem Soleimani and the Trump who withdraw his country out of the JCPOA,” Alizadeh said. “None of the hardliners are saying anything against the talks. So, in fact, it's a matter of survival. They know this is a real game.”

Alizadeh said he advises American officials that Iranian diplomacy should not be compared to the Western model. In Iran’s case, it’s a calculated tool to manipulate perception.

“For Khamenei, diplomacy is a tool. He used it as instrument to trick people that, I am a rational person. Iran under me is a normal country like all the others,” Alizadeh said.

To hear more from Hossein Alizadeh, watch the full episode of Eye for Iran on YouTube or listen on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, Castbox, or Amazon.

On Thursday, the moderate conservative outlet Khabar Online questioned the credibility of reports based on unnamed "informed sources," describing such coverage as “destructive” and driven by factional interests. The website criticized “political celebrities” who allegedly fabricate news to maintain their public profile and called out media outlets publishing such content as “unprofessional.”

In particular, Khabar Online targeted Tehran Times, a hardline English-language daily, for its report ahead of the Oman talks, which quoted anonymous sources as claiming the Americans were only wasting time. The article labeled Tehran Times’ reporting as "irrelevant." The same paper also quoted a source who said the US had no intention of holding constructive negotiations with Iran—an assertion later contradicted by both Tehran and Washington, which described the talks as “positive and constructive.”

Tehran Times is affiliated with the Islamic Propagation Office, a body dominated by hardliners. During the 2014–2015 negotiations that led to the nuclear deal, similar tactics were observed. Press TV, Iran’s English-language state news channel, frequently aired misleading stories intended to undermine the talks. At the time, Press TV was headed by Peyman Jebelli—now the head of state broadcasting, overseeing dozens of Persian and foreign-language channels that continue to distort news about the current negotiations.

Back then, deputy foreign minister Abbas Araghchi publicly criticized Press TV’s reliance on so-called informed sources, saying: “Whoever gives fake news to Press TV as an 'informed source' is certainly not an informed person.” Later, former presidential chief of staff Mahmoud Vaezi blamed Ali Shamkhani and Nour News, a media outlet linked to him, for deliberately trying to derail the talks. Shamkhani was then serving as secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.

He and his family have been implicated with involvement in operations to sell Iranian oil in contravention of current US sanctions.

More recently, conservative commentator Mohammad Mohajeri remarked that “around 90 percent of what is attributed to 'informed sources' is fabricated.” He added that such individuals often blend truth with fiction and lack the courage to identify themselves.

Media activists in Iran have long accused state television and hardline outlets like the Kayhan daily—closely linked to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei—of manipulating the news. As a result, public trust has eroded. According to several domestic and international surveys, Iranians now rely more heavily on social media and foreign-based Persian-language broadcasters for news.

Amid this credibility gap, some officials have sought to exploit the confusion. Following widespread rumors on social media that Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi had taken a valuable golden pen from the negotiating table in Oman, he dismissed the story days later as a fabrication by foreign-based opposition groups. But by then, the narrative had already taken root and spread widely.

A similar pattern emerged in the episode surrounding the change of venue for the second round of talks—from Oman to Rome. Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baghaei initially reacted with a post on X accusing the US of lacking seriousness and commitment. Days later, Gharibabadi attempted to downplay the shift, calling it a “minor development.” But by then, the damage was done. The episode also revealed what Iranian officials appeared keen to conceal: that it was the United States, not Iran, that ultimately determined the venue of the talks.

“With the army behind us, we can express our positions on peace, stability, and regional cooperation from a position of strength,” Pezeshkian said during a ceremony marking Army Day.

He added that the armed forces have helped position Iran as a regional power and said the country now produces its own military equipment. “We build what we need on land, in the air, and at sea,” he said.

Pezeshkian praised the army’s role in responding to national crises and described it as a reliable force alongside the government and people.

The Iranian army, reliant on conscription, is equipped mainly with older generation weapons, many produced during the Soviet Union.

His comments came days after the first round of talks between Iranian and US officials in Oman. Following the talks, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei told military commanders that Iran’s armed forces must maintain maximum readiness to counter external threats. He described the military as the country’s shield and accused foreign powers of trying to weaken public trust in it.

President Donald Trump has threatened strikes if Iran fails to come to an agreement with the United States to curtail or dismantle its nuclear program.

“Armies that lack conviction, courage, and trust in their cause have collapsed, no matter how heavily equipped they were,” Khamenei said.

Khamenei also called for upgrades in weapons, logistics, and personnel support, alongside a continued focus on ideological commitment. Senior military officials echoed the message, saying Iran’s armed forces remain fully prepared and supported by the public.

The plan was presented by Iran’s foreign minister Abbas Araghchi in writing to US President Donald Trump’s special envoy Steve Witkoff during the three-hour talks.

Tehran proposed that in the first stage, it would temporarily reduce its uranium enrichment level to 3.67% in exchange for access to financial assets frozen by the United States and permission to export its oil, the diplomatic sources told Iran International.

In the second phase, the sources added, Iran would permanently end high-level enrichment and restore the United Nations nuclear watchdog's inspections if the United States lifts further sanctions on Iran and persuades Britain, Germany and France to refrain from triggering the so-called snapback of UN sanctions on Tehran.

In this phase, Iran would also commit to implementing the Additional Protocol, a supplementary agreement that allows the UN nuclear watchdog to carry out surprise inspections at sites not declared to the agency.

Tehran ended that compliance in February 2021 after Trump in his first term withdrew from a previous international deal over Iran's nuclear program in 2018.

The third and final stage calls for the US congress to approve the nuclear agreement and for Washington to lift both primary and secondary sanctions, while Iran would transfer its highly enriched uranium stockpiles to a third country.

Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon and the US intelligence assesses that Tehran has not yet resolved to build one, but the Trump administration has warned Iran it must come to a nuclear deal or face attack.

A second round due to be held in Rome on Saturday could prove more rocky than the amicable first round in which Iran submitted its plan for a deal.

Washington toughened its public stance on Tuesday, with both the White House and Witkoff saying that the US goal in negotiations would be the wholesale end of Iran's nuclear program, a notion Iran has repeatedly called a non-starter.

Iran's proposal welcomed by Witkoff

US envoy Witkoff welcomed the proposals presented by the Iranian side, the sources told Iran International, surprising the Iranian delegation in Muscat.

Iranian officialdom appeared cheered by the first round of talks, with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei remarking in a meeting with senior military commanders on Tuesday that "the initial steps have been implemented well".

A diplomatic source outside Tehran expressed skepticism to Iran International of the Islamic Republic's intentions in the talks and said it seeks to delay a foreign attack by staggering an agreement over several complex phases.

“One of the reasons Iran’s Supreme Leader agreed to allow the resumption of negotiations is the need to buy more time, because he knows Iran currently lacks the ability to defend itself against another airstrike," the source said.

“Iran is mainly stalling to buy time to rebuild its air defense capabilities, which were all destroyed by Israel in late October, and to restore its capacity to produce surface-to-surface missiles which were damaged in that same Israeli attack,” the source added.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said on Thursday that his actions had previously thwarted Iran's ability to build a bomb, appearing to respond to a New York Times report that President Trump had halted Israeli plans to attack Iran.

"Netanyahu has led countless secret and open actions in the campaign against Iran's nuclear program that only thanks to them Iran does not have a nuclear arsenal today," the statement said.

Rafael Grossi, the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said on Wednesday Iran was "not far" from possessing an atomic bomb.

"It's like a puzzle: they have the pieces and maybe one day they could put them back together. There's still a long way to go before we get there. But they're not far away, we have to admit that," he said in an interview with Le Monde.

"It's not enough to tell the international community 'we don't have nuclear weapons' for them to believe it. We have to be able to verify it," Grossi said.

In its latest report in March, the IAEA warned that over the past three months, Iran had significantly expanded its reserves of highly enriched uranium, and if this trend continues, its stockpile could theoretically be enough to produce six nuclear bombs.