
美伊瑞士会谈宣布核检查进展,伊朗否认做出新承诺
美国副总统万斯称伊朗同意IAEA检查员返回,但德黑兰方面表示未开始核谈判,双方建立海峡开放与黎巴嫩停火机制。
美国副总统万斯在瑞士布尔根施托克与伊朗议会主席卡利巴夫举行首轮高级别会谈后,于6月22日宣布伊朗已同意邀请国际原子能机构(IAEA)检查员重返该国,并称这是“永久结束伊朗核武计划的第一步”。然而,伊朗外交部发言人巴加埃随即向国家媒体澄清,德黑兰未就核问题做出任何新承诺,与IAEA的关系将继续遵循现有程序,任何改变须经伊朗议会批准。这一相互矛盾的表态,凸显了在巴基斯坦和卡塔尔调解下启动的和平进程的脆弱性。
根据调解方发布的联合声明,美伊双方同意在60天内达成最终协议的路线图,并建立“冲突降级小组”以终止以色列与黎巴嫩真主党之间的军事行动,同时设立沟通渠道确保霍尔木兹海峡的商业航行安全。万斯强调,海峡已重新开放,大量油轮恢复通行,国际油气价格随之回落。他还透露,美方考虑解冻部分伊朗资产,用于购买美国大豆、玉米和小麦,但须经卡塔尔监督。伊朗外长阿拉格齐则在社交媒体上称,黎巴嫩“冲突降级小组”将是检验谈判诚意的“首次真正考验”,并指出石油出口制裁豁免、部分资产解冻及重建计划已启动。
此次会谈是上周美伊签署谅解备忘录后的首次实质性接触。该备忘录为结束始于2月底的战争设定了框架,当时美国与以色列对伊朗发动攻击,伊朗则以导弹和无人机回击并关闭霍尔木兹海峡,引发全球能源市场剧烈震荡。黎巴嫩随后被拖入冲突,以色列与真主党的交火已造成逾4000人死亡,上百万人流离失所。尽管周末以来黎南部相对平静,以色列总理内塔尼亚胡仍坚称以军将继续驻扎并保持“完全行动自由”。美国国会部分共和党人则对协议框架提出尖锐批评,担忧解冻资金可能被用于恐怖活动,为最终协议在国内的批准蒙上阴影。
从亚洲和全球秩序视角看,霍尔木兹海峡的稳定直接关系到中国、日本、韩国等主要石油进口国的能源安全,而巴基斯坦与卡塔尔的调解角色提升了区域国家在中东安全事务中的分量。IAEA检查员若能重返伊朗,将有助于核查其高浓缩铀库存的真实状况——据IAEA估计,伊朗拥有约440公斤丰度60%的浓缩铀,接近武器级水平,且自2025年6月美以轰炸其核设施后,检查已中断一年。技术团队本周将继续在瑞士磋商,但伊朗坚持正式核谈判须在谅解备忘录条款落实后方可启动。未来数周,黎巴嫩停火的持久性、海峡通行机制的实效以及美国国内政治博弈,将共同决定这一“良好基础”能否转化为具有约束力的最终协议。
| 大西洋/英语圈媒体 | +0.30 | aligned |
|---|---|---|
| 以色列媒体 | −0.50 | critical |
| 中国媒体 | −0.20 | neutral |
Washington reasserts its role as guarantor of non-proliferation, presenting the return of inspectors as the result of American resolve, while downplaying Tehran’s denials as negotiating tactics.
It builds a hierarchy where the Iranian threat is implicitly acknowledged but subordinated to US leverage, making it plausible that the step forward is real despite the denials.
It omits the detail that Iran may have only accepted inspections already foreseen in previous agreements, without new concessions, and does not mention European criticism of the Trump administration’s lack of transparency.
Jerusalem denounces the naivety of the American approach and reiterates that only military pressure can stop Iran’s nuclear program, while inspections are merely a palliative.
It personifies the Iranian state as a deceptive and determined actor, making any diplomatic concession an existential threat to Israel, thereby legitimizing calls for unilateral action.
It omits the fact that the IAEA itself has confirmed progress in verification, and gives no space to Iranian voices denying new obligations, presenting them as mere lies.
Beijing invokes respect for Iranian sovereignty and the centrality of the IAEA, presenting the American initiative as an interference that undermines international consensus.
It universalizes the principle of non-interference and presents China’s position as neutral and law-based, making the US move a deviation from shared norms.
It omits the context of Iranian breaches of safeguards obligations and the fact that the IAEA had already reported undeclared activities, so as not to weaken the criticism of Washington.