US, Iran Claim Different Gains After Swiss Talks as IAEA Inspections Resume

The US and Iran reached an agreement in their first follow-up talks in Switzerland after signing a memorandum of understanding, though the next phase of negotiations is expected to be contentious.

Washington is racing to secure a nuclear deal, while Tehran is desperate for funds. Each side is emphasizing the parts of the outcome that best serve its interests.

Major issues remain unresolved, including how to block Iran from retaining a pathway to nuclear weapons capability. At the same time, a 60-day US waiver of sanctions on Iranian oil sales has given Tehran temporary relief from economic pressure.

US Vice President JD Vance, Washington’s chief negotiator, said on June 22 that Iran had agreed to admit inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency. He called the move a “major milestone for the American people.”

“This is exactly the outcome we asked for,” Vance said, adding that there had also been progress in other areas.

The remarks appeared aimed at blunting early criticism in the US, including from opposition figures who have branded the 60-day negotiating window “surrender talks.” By highlighting movement on nuclear inspections at the first follow-up meeting, the administration moved quickly to defend the process.

President Donald Trump reinforced that message on Truth Social, writing that “everyone knows” Iran will agree to accept inspections of major weapons facilities to ensure nuclear transparency.

Iran, however, offered a different interpretation. Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran had “made no new commitments.”

Iran allowed inspections under the 2015 nuclear agreement, but curtailed them after the US withdrew from the deal in 2018. Inspections were effectively halted after a US attack on nuclear facilities last year.

One area of progress was an agreement to create mechanisms to manage disputes tied to the Strait of Hormuz and Lebanon.

The two sides agreed to establish a de-escalation body aimed at preventing clashes between Israel and Hezbollah from derailing the talks. They also agreed to set up a communications line to reduce the risk of miscalculation in the Strait of Hormuz.

Still, critics say those measures amount to a defensive accord that sidesteps the core issues on the table.

The New York Times said the two sides spent much of their time coordinating on matters that should already have been settled, rather than addressing tougher questions.

The US decision to lift sanctions on Iranian oil for 60 days marks a concrete gain for Tehran.

Washington is also reported to have proposed channeling any unfrozen Iranian funds into purchases of US agricultural products, seeking both a softer response from Tehran and support for American farmers.

The approach is intended to aid US farm interests while helping stabilize livelihoods in Iran. Whether Tehran will accept limits on how the money can be used remains unclear.

Doubts persist over whether the two sides can ultimately resolve the central denuclearization issues, including the disposal of highly enriched uranium and a halt to enrichment.

The New York Times said the 60-day period set by the memorandum of understanding was meant to address the underlying issue of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The return of IAEA inspectors alone, it said, remains far from enough to resolve the broader nuclear dispute.

Park Sang-kyung, Hankyung.com reporter, highseoul@hankyung.com