Iran’s enriched uranium re-emerges as point of contention in US talks

Iran’s nuclear enrichment has emerged as a major point of contention amid diplomatic push to end the war.

A worker walks inside of an uranium conversion facility on March 30, 2005 just outside the city of Isfahan. The cities of Isfahan and Natanz in central Iran are home to the heart of Iran's nuclear programme [File: Getty Images]

The renewed diplomatic push to end the United States-Israel war on Iran is facing headwinds as Tehran’s nuclear programme, which the two countries invoked to launch the war in February, has once again emerged as one of the biggest stumbling blocks in reaching a ceasefire.

Nearly eight months into the war, which has caused a global energy crisis, a deal to ensure a permanent ceasefire remains elusive. Moreover, the war has since spilled into a regional conflict, with Yemen emerging as its latest theatre.

The reopening of the Strait of Hormuz – a global oil chokepoint – was the focus of the June Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed between the US and Iran.

The MoU had also stated that Iran “shall not procure or develop nuclear weapons”, but a comprehensive deal, including the nuclear issue, could not be thrashed out within the stipulated 60-day period. Analysts said that differing interpretations of the agreement clauses caused the MoU to fall apart.

Now the nuclear issue has once again emerged as the central point of contention, with Tehran insisting that uranium enrichment is a right guaranteed under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

US President Donald Trump, on the other hand, has called for “zero uranium enrichment”. His ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, on Sunday reiterated his pledge to topple the Iranian government, which he said is key to preventing it from developing nuclear weapons.

Earlier this week, US Vice President JD Vance appeared to offer concessions on the nuclear doctrine to reach a deal.

While Qatar and Pakistan are engaged in mediation efforts, how will they get the sides to agree on the nuclear enrichment issue?

This handout picture provided by the Iranian presidency shows Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian receiving Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir in Tehran on October 20, 2026 [Handout/Iranian presidency via AFP]

What is Iran saying?

Pakistan’s army chief Asim Munir, who is also a key negotiator in the conflict, is currently in Tehran, where he met Iran’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei on Tuesday.

In the meeting, Rezaei said “even a particle of enriched uranium will not exit Iran at all,” according to comments carried by Iran’s semi-official Fars news agency, describing the material as a major national asset that would remain in the country for domestic use.

His response came amid media reports that the US wants Iran to transfer part of its enriched uranium out of the country. Trump has previously called for the removal of the enriched uranium stockpile from Iran.

Rezaei also said negotiations with the US would not begin until Washington fulfils trust-building measures, including meeting the latest conditions Iran has set.

Iran wants the US to lift its naval blockade of Iranian ports, waive sanctions, and release frozen Iranian assets as part of its latest terms to end the war. In return, Iran has promised to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Another Iranian lawmaker, Alaeddin Boroujerdi, also a member of the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, reiterated that Iran is not seeking the production of nuclear weapons.

“Iran’s enrichment activities are unrelated to the US, and Washington should focus on fulfilling its own obligations regarding nuclear arms reduction,” he said.

US President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office, with Vice President JD Vance and Secretary of State Marco Rubio standing behind him, at the White House in Washington, DC [File: Kylie Cooper/Reuters]

Where does the US stand?

Addressing a Republican Party campaign rally earlier this week, Trump claimed that the US bombing had destroyed Iran’s nuclear facilities and that he would not allow Tehran to rebuild them.

“They cannot have a nuclear weapon,” Trump told his supporters at a rally at Northern Kentucky University.

Vice President Vance said earlier this week that the US has “in some ways decisively won” the war on Iran and has destroyed the country’s nuclear programme.

He told a town hall hosted by CBS News that the US was now focused on ensuring that Iran makes a “long-term” and “verifiable commitment” not to rebuild its nuclear programme.

“Not over the administration of Donald Trump … but five years from now, could the Iranians rebuild that nuclear arsenal? Could they try to rebuild that enrichment capacity?” he asked.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also said this week that a decision to end the war finally rests with Trump. “The US will not support any deal that creates a pathway for Iran to have a nuclear weapon. As long as President Trump is in office, they will not have a nuclear weapon,” he reiterated.

Last month, Vance told the Reuters news agency in an interview that Tehran must make a “meaningful” reduction in its nuclear enrichment capacity to satisfy US demands and end the war.

“If you don’t want a nuclear weapon, then why do you need 60 percent enriched fuel? And if you want to show commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, don’t build highly enriched fuel. That’s a very basic threshold issue,” Vance said.

“I think if they want to show a commitment to not building a nuclear weapon, they would do something meaningful on their enrichment capacity,” he added.

What the MoU says about Iran’s uranium programme

The MoU signed on June 17 left the future of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile to further negotiations, but identified downblending under international supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency as the minimum approach to resolving the issue.

Downblending involves mixing highly enriched uranium with lower-enriched material, making it less suitable for rapid conversion into weapons-grade material.

The MoU left room for Iran to reduce the material’s enrichment domestically rather than surrender it. However, it did not specify the quantity to be downblended, a target enrichment level or a detailed implementation timetable.

“The two parties also agreed to discuss the issue of enrichment and other mutually agreed matters related to the Islamic Republic of Iran’s nuclear needs, based on a satisfactory framework being agreed upon in the final deal,” the MoU clause reads.

That final deal, of course, could not be reached as the MoU expired in mid-August.

The Trump administration invoked the imminent threat of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons to launch the war on February 28, 2026. On the first day of the war, US-Israel strikes killed Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who had banned the development of nuclear weapons in a fatwa, or religious edict.

President Trump has often argued that Iran would use the nuclear weapon “within moments after getting it”, and then “the Middle East would be gone, Israel would be gone, and then hit Europe probably next.”

The US president has spoken out against Iran’s nuclear programme numerous times in the past.

As the war progressed over months, the US focus shifted gradually towards reopening the Strait of Hormuz as a base condition of the ongoing fighting.

Speaking in Alaska last week, Trump again falsely claimed that he had to start his war on Iran because, “[Iran was] two weeks away from having a nuclear weapon.”

In April, Trump had warned that “the enriched material, sometimes referred to as ‘Nuclear Dust,’ will be unearthed by the United States … and DESTROYED.” Later in the month, he told reporters on board Air Force One that the US would “go in with Iran, and we will take it together, and we will bring it back. 100 percent of it back to the United States.”

Mostafa Najafi, a foreign policy analyst based in Iran, noted that “despite [the US’s] insistence on nuclear negotiations and obtaining tangible concessions in this area, [Washington is] unwilling to offer significant concessions such as lifting sanctions.”

The US wants “to secure major concessions solely in exchange for lifting the blockade and releasing some of Iran’s assets”, he wrote in a post on X. “From Iran’s perspective, lifting the blockade and releasing assets is no longer a noteworthy concession for Tehran!”

在各方努力通过外交手段结束战争的过程中，伊朗的核浓缩活动已成为一个主要争议点。

2005年3月30日，一名工人在伊朗伊斯法罕市郊的一处铀转化设施内行走。伊朗中部的伊斯法罕和纳坦兹是伊朗核计划的核心所在地。[图片来源：Getty Images]

美国和以色列为结束对​​伊朗的战争而重新展开的外交努力正面临阻力，因为德黑兰的核计划（两国在2月份以此为由发动了战争）再次成为达成停火的最大绊脚石之一。

这场战争已持续近八个月，并引发了全球能源危机，但确保永久停火的协议仍遥遥无期。此外，战争已蔓延至地区冲突，也门成为最新的战场。

重新开放霍尔木兹海峡（全球石油咽喉要道）是美国和伊朗在6月份签署的谅解备忘录(MoU)的重点。

该谅解备忘录还规定伊朗“不得获取或发展核武器”，但包括核问题在内的全面协议未能在规定的60天期限内达成一致。分析人士指出，对协议条款的不同解读导致了谅解备忘录的破裂。

现在，核问题再次成为争论的焦点，德黑兰方面坚持认为，铀浓缩是《不扩散核武器条约》（NPT）保障的权利。

另一方面，美国总统唐纳德·特朗普呼吁“零铀浓缩”。他的盟友、以色列总理本雅明·内塔尼亚胡周日重申了他推翻伊朗政府的承诺，他表示，推翻伊朗政府是阻止其发展核武器的关键。

本周早些时候，美国副总统万斯似乎在核战略问题上做出了让步，以达成协议。

尽管卡塔尔和巴基斯坦正在进行调解努力，但他们将如何促使双方就核浓缩问题达成一致呢？

这张由伊朗总统府提供的照片显示，伊朗总统马苏德·佩泽什基安于2026年10月20日在德黑兰会见了巴基斯坦陆军参谋长阿西姆·穆尼尔。[伊朗总统府供图，经法新社发布]

伊朗方面说了什么？

巴基斯坦陆军参谋长阿西姆·穆尼尔同时也是这场冲突的关键谈判者，他目前正在德黑兰，并于周二会见了伊朗安全局局长穆赫辛·雷扎伊。

据伊朗半官方的法尔斯通讯社报道，雷扎伊在会议上表示，“即使是一粒浓缩铀也不会离开伊朗”，并将这种材料描述为重要的国家资产，将留在国内供国内使用。

他的回应正值媒体报道称美国希望伊朗将其部分浓缩铀转移出境之际。特朗普此前曾呼吁伊朗移除其浓缩铀库存。

雷扎伊还表示，在华盛顿履行建立信任措施（包括满足伊朗提出的最新条件）之前，与美国的谈判不会开始。

伊朗希望美国解除对伊朗港口的海上封锁，放弃制裁，并解冻伊朗资产，作为其最新结束战争条件的一部分。作为交换，伊朗承诺重新开放霍尔木兹海峡。

另一位伊朗议员，同时也是伊朗议会国家安全和外交政策委员会成员的阿拉丁·博鲁杰尔迪重申，伊朗并不寻求制造核武器。

他说：“伊朗的铀浓缩活动与美国无关，华盛顿应该专注于履行其在核裁军方面的义务。”

美国总统唐纳德·特朗普在白宫椭圆形办公室发表讲话，副总统JD·万斯和国务卿马可·卢比奥站在他身后。[图片：Kylie Cooper/路透社]

美国的立场是什么？

本周早些时候，特朗普在共和党竞选集会上发表讲话时声称，美国的轰炸摧毁了伊朗的核设施，他不会允许德黑兰重建这些设施。

“他们不能拥有核武器，”特朗普在北肯塔基大学的一次集会上告诉他的支持者。

副总统万斯本周早些时候表示，美国“在某些方面取得了决定性的胜利”，摧毁了伊朗的核计划。

他在哥伦比亚广播公司新闻部主办的市政厅会议上表示，美国现在的重点是确保伊朗做出“长期”和“可核查的承诺”，不再重建其核计划。

他问道：“不是说在唐纳德·特朗普执政期间……而是五年后，伊朗是否有可能重建核武库？他们是否有可能重建浓缩铀能力？”

美国国务卿马可·卢比奥本周也表示，结束战争的最终决定权在于特朗普。“美国不会支持任何为伊朗获得核武器铺平道路的协议。只要特朗普总统还在任，他们就不可能拥有核武器。”他重申道。

上个月，万斯在接受路透社采访时表示，德黑兰必须大幅削减其核浓缩能力，以满足美国的要求并结束战争。

“如果你不想拥有核武器，那为什么需要60%浓缩燃料？如果你想表明不制造核武器的决心，那就不要制造高浓缩燃料。这是一个非常基本的底线问题，”万斯说。

“我认为，如果他们想表明不制造核武器的决心，他们应该在浓​​缩铀能力方面做一些有意义的事情，”他补充道。

该谅解备忘录对伊朗铀计划的规定

6 月 17 日签署的谅解备忘录将伊朗浓缩铀库存的未来交由进一步谈判解决，但明确指出在国际原子能机构的国际监督下降低浓缩铀含量是解决该问题的最低方法。

降混是指将高浓缩铀与低浓缩材料混合，使其不太适合快速转化为武器级材料。

该谅解备忘录允许伊朗在国内降低铀浓缩水平，而不是交出铀浓缩物。然而，备忘录并未具体说明需要降低浓缩水平的数量、目标浓缩水平或详细的实施时间表。

“双方还同意在最终协议中达成令人满意的框架基础上，讨论浓缩铀问题以及与伊朗伊斯兰共和国核需求相关的其他双方同意的事项，”谅解备忘录条款写道。

当然，由于谅解备忘录在 8 月中旬到期，最终协议未能达成。

特朗普政府援引伊朗即将获得核武器的威胁，于 2026 年 2 月 28 日发动战争。战争第一天，美以联军空袭炸死了伊朗最高领袖阿亚图拉·阿里·哈梅内伊，他曾颁布教令禁止伊朗发展核武器。

特朗普总统经常声称，伊朗“一旦获得核武器，就会立即使用”，然后“中东将不复存在，以色列将不复存在，接下来很可能会袭击欧洲”。

美国总统过去曾多次公开反对伊朗的核计划。

随着战争持续数月，美国的重心逐渐转移到重新开放霍尔木兹海峡，以此作为持续战斗的基本条件。

上周在阿拉斯加发表讲话时，特朗普再次错误地声称，他不得不对伊朗发动战争，因为“伊朗距离拥有核武器只有两周的时间”。

今年4月，特朗普曾警告说，“美国将挖掘出这些有时被称为‘核尘埃’的浓缩物质……并将其销毁。”当月晚些时候，他在空军一号上告诉记者，美国将“与伊朗联合行动，共同获取这些物质，并将其带回美国。百分之百带回美国。”

常驻伊朗的外交政策分析师穆斯塔法·纳贾菲指出，“尽管（美国）坚持进行核谈判并希望在这一领域获得切实的让步，但（华盛顿）却不愿意做出重大让步，例如解除制裁。”

他在X网站上发帖写道，美国希望“仅仅为了解除封锁和释放伊朗的部分资产，就获得重大让步”。“从伊朗的角度来看，解除封锁和释放资产对德黑兰来说已经不再是值得一提的让步了！”