SRINAGAR: High-stakes peace talks between the United States and Iran ended without an agreement on Sunday after more than 21 hours of negotiations in Islamabad, with both sides blaming each other for the breakdown while leaving the door open for future engagement, international media reported.
Announcing the outcome, US Vice President J.D. Vance said the failure to reach a deal was “bad news,” particularly for Tehran, which he accused of rejecting Washington’s terms.
“The bad news is that we have not reached an agreement. We just could not get to a situation where the Iranians would accept our terms,” Vance told reporters before departing Pakistan aboard Air Force Two.
At the heart of the breakdown was Washington’s demand for an explicit Iranian commitment to abandon any pursuit of nuclear weapons or related capabilities.
“The simple fact is that we need to see an affirmative commitment that they will not seek a nuclear weapon and they will not seek the tools that would enable them to quickly achieve a nuclear weapon,” Vance said.
Despite the impasse, he indicated that diplomacy had not entirely collapsed, describing the US proposal as a “final and best offer” that remains open for Tehran’s consideration.
The talks marked the first direct, face-to-face engagement between the two sides since the 2015 nuclear deal negotiated under former US President Barack Obama—later abandoned during the administration of Donald Trump.
Iranian officials offered a sharply different account, accusing Washington of making “excessive” and “unlawful” demands. In a statement, Iran’s foreign ministry confirmed that negotiations ended without agreement due to disagreements on “two to three key issues,” though some areas of understanding had been reached.
Iran maintained that it had presented “reasonable initiatives” and insisted that the United States was attempting to secure concessions it had failed to achieve during the ongoing conflict.
Among Tehran’s reported demands were an end to Israeli military operations against Hezbollah in Lebanon, the release of $6 billion in frozen Iranian assets, guarantees over its nuclear programme, and continued control over the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
Iranian officials also signalled that the waterway—critical for global oil shipments—would remain closed to normal traffic unless a “reasonable deal” is reached.
The negotiations took place against the backdrop of a fragile, Pakistan-brokered ceasefire in a six-week conflict involving Iran, the United States, and Israel. The truce appeared increasingly tenuous as Israeli strikes continued in Lebanon.
The Israel Defence Forces said they had hit more than 200 targets linked to Hezbollah in the past 24 hours, underscoring the volatility surrounding the talks.
Meanwhile, US military activity signalled parallel pressure tactics. Two American guided-missile destroyers transited the Strait of Hormuz for the first time since the conflict began, as U.S. Central Command initiated operations to clear Iranian sea mines and reopen commercial shipping lanes.
Diplomatic sources described the Islamabad talks as highly complex, involving multiple formats—from indirect shuttle diplomacy to direct engagement and even text-based exchanges of proposals between delegations.
The US delegation included senior figures such as envoy Steve Witkoff and presidential adviser Jared Kushner, while Iran’s team was led by parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.
Despite some progress on secondary issues, negotiators failed to bridge fundamental differences—particularly on nuclear restrictions, regional security, and economic concessions.
The collapse of the Islamabad talks leaves the future of the ceasefire uncertain and raises the risk of renewed escalation, especially around the Strait of Hormuz—a chokepoint for global energy supplies.
While both sides indicated that diplomacy remains an option, the sharp divergence in positions suggests that any breakthrough will require significant concessions that neither Washington nor Tehran currently appears willing to make.
For now, the first direct US-Iran talks in over a decade have ended inconclusively—highlighting both the urgency of de-escalation and the enduring depth of mistrust between the two adversaries.
