WANA (Apr 17) – Kazem Gharibabadi, Deputy for Legal and International Affairs at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Iran, appeared in an interview on Wednesday evening and provided detailed explanations about the first round of indirect talks between Iran and the United States in Muscat, the capital of Oman, as well as the outlook for the second round of talks, which is scheduled to take place on Saturday, April 19.

 

Venue Must Be Geographically Neutral and Logistically Practical

Regarding the location of Iran-US talks, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi emphasized that future indirect talks between Iran and the U.S.—whether in Muscat, another regional country, or Europe—should be held at a venue equidistant to both parties and logistically feasible.

 

He noted that while Oman is geographically closer to Iran, it may not be ideal for the U.S., and such considerations must be taken into account. Regardless of the location, he stressed that Oman will remain the primary mediator, with its foreign minister facilitating the dialogue.

 

Location Is Not a Decisive Factor for Iran

Gharibabadi stated that Iran does not consider the venue a decisive issue. If the U.S. proposes a meeting, Iran would review it positively—unless the suggested country poses political, strategic, or logistical challenges. Iran may also propose its own options, but the real focus lies in the content and outcomes of the talks, not the place.

 

First Round Focused on Seriousness and Core Positions

Describing the first round of talks, Gharibabadi explained that its purpose was to evaluate whether both sides were serious and whether a meaningful dialogue could emerge. During this stage, each side shared its key principles and positions. Because there were no major disputes, the indirect talks, despite requiring mediation, were concluded in less than three hours.

 

Early Success Doesn’t Guarantee Long-Term Results

He cautioned against interpreting the swift first round as a sign of long-term success. Negotiations are an ongoing process, and upcoming rounds will clarify how committed the other party is to reaching a mutually acceptable outcome and how much it may be influenced by third-party pressures.

 

Iran’s Approach Based on Realism, Not Optimism

Gharibabadi emphasized that Iran’s approach is neither overly optimistic nor pessimistic, but grounded in the realities of the negotiations. In line with the Supreme Leader’s guidance, Iran has communicated its views and framework for a potential agreement clearly and decisively in the first round.

 

Iran Prepared for Sustained, Serious Negotiations

He underlined Iran’s readiness for genuine dialogue, noting that its participation is not tactical or symbolic. “We’ve made it clear to the other side that we’re not here to waste time. If needed, we’re ready to engage in multiple consecutive days of talks to assess whether an understanding can be reached,” he said.

 

Regional Military Buildup Casts Doubt on U.S. Sincerity

Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi raised concerns about the U.S.’s true intentions in the renewed indirect dialogue with Iran. He questioned whether Washington is genuinely committed to reaching an understanding or merely engaging in a symbolic process. He pointed to recent U.S. military activities and deployments in the region, which he said could undermine claims of serious intent.

 

Iran Defends Peaceful Nature of Its Nuclear Program

Gharibabadi said that Iran expects the talks to naturally center on two primary issues. The first is its nuclear program. He criticized what he described as unfounded and legally baseless concerns raised by Western parties, asserting that Iran’s nuclear activities remain under continuous IAEA monitoring and have consistently been confirmed as peaceful.

 

He added that although there is no evidence of any military diversion, Iran remains open to confidence-building measures and, if necessary, additional voluntary commitments.

 

Sanctions Relief Must Translate Into Tangible Benefits

The second core issue, according to Gharibabadi, is the lifting of what he called “unjust, illegal, and unilateral” sanctions. He stressed that sanctions relief must lead to practical and visible economic benefits for the Iranian people, not just exist on paper.

 

Iran does not differentiate between the types of sanctions—whether labeled nuclear, human rights, missile-related, or regional—so long as they negatively impact its economy, he said. Tehran has clearly communicated to the U.S. that these two issues—nuclear restrictions and sanctions relief—must be the exclusive focus of the negotiations, and the American side has reportedly acknowledged this framework.

 

No Talks Beyond the Nuclear File

Reiterating Iran’s position, Gharibabadi stated that Tehran has no intention of negotiating issues beyond the nuclear file. There is no mandate to engage in talks labeled as “other issues,” he said. Iran is entering the talks with specific objectives and seeks a fair, balanced, and lasting agreement—one that would not be easily revoked due to political shifts such as a change in government.

 

He added that Iran is open to reaching such an agreement, provided it does not involve undue pressure or humiliation. Both sides reportedly accepted this framework as a basis for continuing talks.

 

No Text Drafting Yet; Priority Is Agreement on Structure

Looking ahead, Gharibabadi said the second round of talks will focus on outlining the framework and agenda. If discussions on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions relief are to move forward meaningfully, both sides must first agree on what specific actions should be taken, what areas should be examined, and which sanctions must be lifted.

 

He clarified that at this stage, detailed text drafting is not on the agenda; rather, the goal is to establish a shared understanding of the general structure before moving into any drafting phase.

 

Progress in Second Round Seen as Achievable

Kazem Gharibabadi stated that progress in the upcoming round of talks is realistic if both parties show seriousness. He noted that text drafting would only begin once a consensus on the structure and agenda is reached. While reaching such an agreement is complex and demanding, it is not impossible—especially if the U.S. maintains the constructive approach it took in the first round.

 

IAEA Has Never Reported Iranian Weaponization Efforts

In response to allegations about Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Gharibabadi emphasized that possession of nuclear materials does not equate to weaponization. He pointed out that the IAEA is the only legitimate authority in this regard, and it has never issued a report suggesting Iran has attempted to build a nuclear weapon.

 

Claims that Iran has enough material for a bomb are misleading and ignore the technical and political realities of weapons development.

 

Western Double Standards Undermine Credibility

Gharibabadi criticized the selective outrage over Iran’s nuclear program, noting that some unnamed countries possess the materials to produce hundreds of nuclear warheads but face no international objections. Meanwhile, Israel, a known nuclear-armed state in the region, is never pressured to join the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

 

He called such criticism artificial and politically motivated, arguing that genuine concern over nuclear proliferation would require equal pressure on all parties, including Israel.

 

Iran Calls for Mutual Recognition of Concerns

Despite what he described as exaggerated fears, Gharibabadi reaffirmed Iran’s readiness to discuss nuclear-related concerns—but emphasized that Iran, too, has legitimate security concerns that deserve to be addressed. Any resulting agreement must be based on mutual understanding, not one-sided demands.

 

Second Round Could Involve Technical Experts

Reflecting on the first round in Muscat, Gharibabadi said the short meeting was due to limited initial knowledge of each side’s positions. However, both sides were prepared to extend discussions if needed.

 

In the upcoming round, Iran expects the U.S. to participate in drafting a clear negotiation framework, which could pave the way for more detailed discussions led by technical teams—and, if appropriate, begin text drafting.

 

Contradictory U.S. Messaging Undermines Trust

Gharibabadi criticized recent remarks by U.S. officials, particularly Witkoff’s claim that Iran has no right to enrich uranium. This contradicts earlier U.S. statements that enrichment up to 3.67%—as specified in the JCPOA—is acceptable. He stressed that Iran’s policy decisions will be based on formal and consistent positions made during negotiations, not fluctuating media statements.

 

Iran Has Never Breached Its Enrichment Commitments

The Iranian official reiterated that Iran has never exceeded its enrichment commitments, and the program remains peaceful, indigenous, and transparent. Neither the NPT nor the IAEA statute prohibits enrichment, he said—the only legal requirement is that the program must not be diverted to military purposes.

 

Iran’s Enrichment Program Is Not Up for Negotiation

Gharibabadi underscored that Iran’s enrichment program is a matter of national dignity, built through years of scientific effort and sacrifice. While Iran is open to discussing measures that address concerns about military use, any demand to shut down the program entirely is unacceptable and non-negotiable.

 

Negotiations Must Be Grounded in Realism, Not Illusion

Tehran urged the U.S. to approach talks with realistic and rational demands, warning that excessive or unreasonable expectations would only erode trust. Gharibabadi called for a serious U.S. commitment to recognizing Iran’s officially stated positions if any genuine progress is to be made.

 

Threats and Sanctions Incompatible with Dialogue

Explaining Iran’s refusal to hold direct talks with the U.S., Gharibabadi cited Washington’s reliance on threats and unilateral sanctions.

 

He said no meaningful dialogue can occur in a climate of coercion, especially given America’s past withdrawal from the JCPOA and imposition of maximum pressure. He argued that negotiations in such an environment lack trust and can even backfire by hardening positions on both sides.

 

Iran Will Defend Its Interests if National Security Is Endangered

He stated that threats and pressure tactics are incompatible with the logic of diplomacy. Iran, he said, possesses the necessary tools to respond proportionately to any external threats. Echoing the Supreme Leader, he warned that any attempt to compromise Iran’s security would result in reciprocal consequences.

 

Sanctions Have Failed to Change Iran’s Behavior

Kazem Gharibabadi stated that U.S. sanctions have not achieved their core goals — halting Iran’s nuclear program or changing its political stance. Despite economic pressure, he stressed the importance of neutralizing sanctions domestically and reducing reliance on negotiations.

 

U.S. Turned to Talks Because Sanctions Didn’t Work

He argued that if sanctions had been truly effective, the U.S. wouldn’t have returned to the negotiating table. Iran, he said, has maintained its strength and never accepted pressure or threats — and that’s why dialogue was initiated.

 

A Win-Win Agreement Is Possible

According to Gharibabadi, both sides can benefit from a deal that addresses mutual concerns. He reiterated that Iran has no intention of pursuing nuclear weapons, as such weapons have no place in its nuclear or military doctrine.

 

Iran Has a Clear Negotiation Formula

Iran’s approach is based on mutual trust and the practical lifting of sanctions, aimed at improving the nation’s economic conditions. He stressed that halting uranium enrichment has never been and will never be an option.

 

The ‘Zero Enrichment’ Policy Has Always Failed

Gharibabadi noted that even during the Obama-era talks, Western powers had to abandon the unrealistic demand of “zero enrichment,” recognizing Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear technology.

 

Constructive Engagement with IAEA to Continue

He described Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA as consistent, despite past disputes. Reductions in oversight were a response to Western non-compliance, not hostility toward the Agency.

 

Too Early for IAEA to Step In

In response to IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi’s recent remarks, Gharibabadi said it’s premature for the Agency to insert itself into current talks. However, once an agreement is reached, Iran is ready to engage the IAEA on verification.

 

IAEA Must Remain Independent

He emphasized that the IAEA should not be influenced by certain political powers, reminding that the Agency serves all member states equally.

 

Iran Calls for IAEA Transparency on Threats Against Nuclear Facilities

Gharibabadi emphasized that the IAEA must take a clear stance against threats targeting Iran’s nuclear facilities. “The Agency cannot remain politically passive,” he stated, noting that it strictly monitors Iran’s commitments under the Safeguards Agreement yet remains silent when those very facilities are threatened with attacks. He added that Foreign Minister Araghchi raised this concern during Director General Grossi’s visit to Tehran.

 

Iran-Russia Relations Are Strategic

Commenting on Foreign Minister Araghchi’s visit to Moscow, Gharibabadi described Russia as a key strategic partner. He said the two countries have signed a Comprehensive Strategic Partnership Treaty, recently ratified in Russia and currently under review in Iran’s parliament.

 

Araghchi’s visit to Moscow, he said, serves two main purposes: to deliver a message from the Supreme Leader to President Putin, and to explore ways to expand bilateral, multilateral, and international cooperation.

 

Close Coordination with China and Russia in Nuclear Talks

Gharibabadi stressed the importance of coordination with Iran’s strategic partners. “We have always kept Russia and China informed throughout every phase of nuclear negotiations,” he said. Both countries have consistently supported dialogue, opposed threats, and emphasized the need to lift unjust sanctions. Iran aims to maintain and strengthen its ties with both.

 

Updating Partners Post-Muscat Talks

Following the first round of indirect talks with the U.S. in Muscat, Gharibabadi visited Moscow to brief Russian officials. Araghchi is also set to meet President Putin personally. Meanwhile, Iranian diplomats have met with the Chinese ambassador in Tehran to share updates on the discussions. Gharibabadi emphasized that maintaining this level of consultation is essential and will continue.

 

Ongoing Dialogue with European Troika

On European involvement, Gharibabadi said that while the ongoing talks are primarily between Iran and the U.S., four rounds of dialogue have also been held with the E3 (UK, France, and Germany).

 

“We remain in regular contact,” he said, mentioning a recent meeting between Iran’s political deputy foreign minister and the three ambassadors in Tehran. However, he underscored that since it is the U.S. that imposed the sanctions, direct negotiations with Washington are essential.

 

Europe’s Role Remains Important

He acknowledged the E3’s role but noted that even European officials admit they cannot fulfill their obligations regarding sanctions relief unless the U.S. is directly involved. “That is why these talks are currently focused on Iran and the United States,” he said, adding that Iran will continue coordinating with European partners as needed.

 

Outcome Depends on the U.S. Position

When asked whether a deal could be reached soon, Gharibabadi said that the outcome depends entirely on the other side’s will and consistency. “If they maintain the same approach they had in the first round in Muscat, a mutual understanding may not take long,” he noted. “But if their position changes, the process will inevitably become more complicated.”

 

Iranian Delegation Committed to Representing the Nation with Dignity

Asked about recent personal rumours about him, Gharibabadi refrained from defending himself but emphasized his role. “We are the representatives of the Iranian people. They should trust that their interests, dignity, and culture are being defended,” he said. He also mentioned his past efforts in the judiciary to prosecute the MEK and assist in securing the release of Iranian diplomats detained abroad. “The MEK’s hostility is no surprise, but it will never shake our resolve.”