# US–Iran War-End Talks Snag On Nuclear Terms, Sanctions Relief *Monday, May 25, 2026 at 6:04 PM UTC — Hamer Intelligence Services Desk* **Published**: 2026-05-25T18:04:48.121Z (2h ago) **Category**: geopolitics | **Region**: Middle East **Importance**: 9/10 **Sources**: OSINT **Permalink**: https://hamerintel.com/data/articles/5303.md **Source**: https://hamerintel.com/summaries --- **Deck**: On 25 May around 17:03 UTC, reports indicated the US and Iran are still negotiating final details of a deal to end their ongoing war, with disputes centered on Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile and the sequencing of sanctions relief. Both sides remain publicly optimistic but are sharpening their messaging ahead of potential compromises. ## Key Takeaways - As of 25 May 2026, US–Iran negotiations to end the war remain unresolved, with core disputes over enriched uranium disposition and sanctions relief. - Washington is pressing Iran to relinquish highly enriched uranium and provide assurances against nuclear weaponization before easing key sanctions. - Tehran seeks firm guarantees on durable sanctions lifting and asset unfreezing and has rejected reports that it will export enriched uranium as “psychological warfare.” - Iranian military leaders continue tough rhetoric, asserting strength and warning of “fatal” blows if US pressure persists. - Despite public posturing, both sides describe the talks as progressing and express optimism about a possible compromise. On 25 May 2026, at approximately 17:03 UTC, diplomatic reporting underscored that negotiations between the United States and Iran to end their war have entered a critical but unresolved phase. The two principal sticking points are the fate of Iran’s highly enriched uranium stockpile and the sequencing, scope, and guarantees attached to sanctions relief and asset unfreezing. US negotiators are said to insist that any durable settlement must include verifiable steps by Iran to give up its inventory of highly enriched uranium and to bind itself not to pursue nuclear weapons. These assurances likely encompass physical removal or downblending of enriched material, intrusive inspections, and constraints on advanced centrifuges and weaponization-related research. In exchange, Washington is prepared to ease a significant portion of sanctions but wants mechanisms to reimpose them swiftly if Tehran is deemed non-compliant. Iran, however, is demanding strong guarantees that sanctions relief will be both meaningful and lasting. Officials in Tehran recall previous experiences where sanctions were reintroduced, and they seek legal, financial, and possibly multilateral structures that make it politically and technically harder for future US administrations to reverse commitments. This includes unfreezing blocked assets, normalizing banking channels, and enabling energy and non-energy exports without the constant threat of secondary sanctions. Against this backdrop, Iran is managing expectations at home. At 17:19–17:20 UTC on 25 May, a spokesperson for the Tasnim-affiliated media apparatus firmly denied that Tehran was prepared to remove enriched uranium from the country, labeling such claims as part of an American psychological warfare campaign. The official stressed that no draft memorandum includes provisions for shipping nuclear materials abroad or halting enrichment entirely. This messaging serves to reassure domestic hardliners and keep negotiation space open without conceding high-visibility red lines in public. The military wing is reinforcing this posture. At 17:05 UTC, Brigadier General Hassan Hassanzadeh, commander of Tehran’s IRGC forces, declared that Iran is “stronger today than on the first day of the war” with the US and Israel, warning that continued Western “threats and pressure” would invite “heavy, fatal, and regrettable blows.” Such statements highlight Iran’s intent to maintain a deterrent edge while talks continue, signaling that it retains escalation options. The maritime domain has emerged as a complementary bargaining arena. Around 17:06–17:01 UTC, Iran’s Foreign Ministry clarified that it will not impose direct transit fees on ships using the Strait of Hormuz. Instead, Tehran plans to charge for maritime services and environmental protection in the Persian Gulf and Gulf of Oman. This calibrated approach allows Iran to claim the moral high ground in preserving freedom of navigation while still seeking new revenue streams and regulatory leverage. ## Outlook & Way Forward In the near term, the talks are likely to center on technical compromise formulas for the nuclear file. Options may include partial export and partial downblending of enriched uranium, time-bound limitations on enrichment levels, and phased sanctions relief with snapback clauses triggered by clearly defined violations. Third-party custodianship of some nuclear material, or storage under enhanced international monitoring, could offer a middle ground. Politically, both sides must navigate domestic constituencies opposed to perceived capitulation. In Iran, the leadership must persuade the IRGC and hardline factions that the concessions do not undermine sovereignty or strategic deterrence. In the US, any deal will face scrutiny from Congress and regional allies concerned about verification and enforcement. Public statements like those issued on 25 May serve dual purposes: reinforcing bargaining positions while managing internal expectations. If the diplomatic track succeeds, immediate benefits could include de-escalation across multiple regional flashpoints, easing of pressure on global energy markets, and a reduction in missile and drone attacks against US and allied assets. Failure, however, risks a renewed spiral of escalatory moves, including Iranian advances in enrichment and potential maritime disruptions, met by US military and economic countermeasures. Indicators to watch include leaks about specific nuclear and sanctions timelines, movement of enriched material under international supervision, adjustments to US sanctions designations, and any visible scaling down of Iranian proxy activities. The decisions taken in the coming weeks will shape not just the trajectory of the war but the regional security architecture for years ahead.