World ( The cow news digital ) A leading US financial newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, has claimed that Iran has indicated willingness to temporarily suspend uranium enrichment as part of its response to recent diplomatic proposals aimed at reducing tensions with the United States.
According to the report, Tehran conveyed its position through indirect channels in response to ceasefire-related discussions. The alleged proposal suggests that Iran may consider a short-term pause in uranium enrichment activities, signaling a limited openness to de-escalation. However, the report also states that Iran firmly rejected Washington’s demand for a prolonged 20-year suspension of enrichment, describing it as unacceptable.
The newspaper further reported that Iran has proposed a phased approach to reopening the Strait of Hormuz, a key global shipping route, alongside calls for the gradual lifting of US sanctions and any form of maritime blockade. Tehran also reportedly suggested that formal nuclear negotiations could take place within 30 days, provided certain conditions are met.
In contrast, Iran has rejected US demands to dismantle its nuclear facilities, maintaining that its nuclear infrastructure remains a sovereign right. The reported proposals highlight a continued gap between both sides on core issues despite signs of limited flexibility.
However, Iranian officials have strongly disputed the accuracy of the report. State-linked sources and media outlets in Tehran described the claims as misleading and said that the original response contained different terms. According to Iranian sources, the actual proposal emphasized an immediate and comprehensive ceasefire across all fronts, along with guarantees that no further attacks would be carried out against Iran.
Iranian representatives also reportedly demanded the lifting of all US sanctions, including restrictions on oil exports, as well as the unfreezing of Iranian assets held abroad. Additionally, Tehran is said to have called for the removal of any maritime restrictions once a formal agreement is signed.
The conflicting narratives highlight ongoing uncertainty in indirect communications between Washington and Tehran, where diplomatic messaging is often transmitted through intermediaries and subject to differing interpretations.
Analysts say the disagreement over what was actually proposed underscores the fragility of current diplomatic efforts. While the reported willingness to temporarily pause enrichment may indicate a tactical opening, Iran’s strong rejection of long-term limits and its counter-demands reflect deep mistrust between the two sides.
As both governments continue to exchange messages through indirect channels, the international community remains cautious, watching closely for any sign of breakthrough or further escalation in the already tense standoff.
