Tehran’s top diplomatic spokesperson has accused Washington of shifting and contradictory negotiating positions, describing the current diplomatic environment as “very unstable and very dangerous.” In an interview with CNN’s Frederik Pleitgen on Sunday, Esmaeil Baghaei, the Iranian foreign ministry spokesman, said that the main problem in talks with the United States is the constant change in its objectives and red lines. Despite the turbulence, he confirmed that exchanges of messages continue through Pakistani intermediaries, a channel that has quietly endured amid fluctuating tensions.

Baghaei underscored that the United States must recognise Iran’s rights under international law, specifically the right to peaceful nuclear enrichment enshrined in the Non-Proliferation Treaty. “The core issue is that the Americans need to understand they must acknowledge Iran’s rights,” he said, adding that when it comes to frozen assets, Washington refuses to budge. The spokesman described the negotiation process as “very arduous” due to the need to navigate multiple, often contradictory statements from various US officials. The lack of clarity, he suggested, prevents any meaningful progress.

Viewed from Tehran, the accusations reflect a deep frustration with Washington’s inability to present a unified front. Meanwhile, analysts in London note that the US approach under the current administration has oscillated between diplomatic overtures and threats of maximum pressure, perpetuating a cycle of mistrust. The use of Pakistani mediators, while keeping a line of communication open, has not yet bridged the fundamental gaps. From Islamabad, the role is seen as a delicate balancing act, offering a creative formula for de-escalation that both sides have so far proven reluctant to fully embrace.

Baghaei also issued a stark warning that Iran would respond to any attack, a statement that underlines the precariousness of the current standoff. The remark came amid heightened regional tensions and fears of military escalation. The Iranian position remains that its nuclear programme is peaceful and its rights non-negotiable, a stance that has consistently collided with US demands for strict limits on enrichment.

As both sides dig in, the path forward appears narrow. Without a fundamental shift in Washington’s posture—or a reciprocal gesture from Tehran—the mediation effort risks becoming a permanent fixture of a frozen conflict. For now, the message from Iran is clear: recognition of its rights is the prerequisite for any serious engagement, and the United States’ perceived inconsistency only deepens the already dangerous impasse.