Iran’s UN mission issued a statement on Saturday. The mission said no enrichment limit exists under International Atomic Energy Agency supervision. According to Tehran, Iran can enrich uranium at any level as long as the IAEA monitors all nuclear activities. Therefore, Iran argues that no legally binding enrichment limit applies to the country.
The Iranian mission also criticized the United States on social media, arguing that Washington has failed to comply with its nuclear obligations. The U.S. possesses thousands of nuclear warheads while remaining, in Tehran’s view, the world’s leading proliferator of such weapons. Moreover, the mission claimed that Washington has violated the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons for 56 years. Consequently, Iran argued that no enrichment limit should apply exclusively to Tehran.
The mission specifically cited Articles I and VI of the treaty, which address non-proliferation and nuclear disarmament. However, the Iranian statement described the U.S. record as deeply shameful. Tehran also insisted that Washington should not receive political cover because, according to the mission, U.S. policies remain both outrageous and hypocritical. Nevertheless, Iran maintained that no enrichment limit exists under proper international supervision.
Iran defended what it described as its right to enrich uranium without restriction. In addition, the mission reiterated that no limitation can apply as long as the IAEA supervises Iran’s nuclear activities. Tehran stressed that the agency continues monitoring its entire uranium stockpile, while inspectors have reported no diversion of nuclear materials. Therefore, Iran argues that it has violated no enrichment limit.
The U.S. and Israel launched a war on February 28. According to Iranian officials, the attacks assassinated Iran’s leader while also targeting nuclear facilities, schools, hospitals, and civilian infrastructure. In response, Iran launched 100 waves of retaliatory strikes. Later, a temporary ceasefire took effect on April 8, although the nuclear dispute remains unresolved.
Iran and the U.S. also held talks in Islamabad, where negotiations lasted 21 hours on April 11. However, the discussions ended without a breakthrough because Iran accused Washington of making excessive demands. As a result, the core dispute over uranium enrichment continues despite ongoing diplomatic efforts.
The U.S. demands zero enrichment from Iran, whereas Tehran insists on its right to enrich uranium for civilian purposes. Meanwhile, President Donald Trump has threatened to resume attacks and mentioned power plants and bridges as possible targets. Iran says Trump wants Tehran to accept strict conditions, including reopening the Strait of Hormuz.
Washington also demands access to Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile. Consequently, Iran has refused to fully return to the diplomatic process. Tehran insists that the U.S. must first lift its naval blockade because the restrictions continue affecting Iranian vessels and ports. Iran has kept the Strait closed since the war began, and officials say they will not reopen the waterway under current conditions.
Iranian officials argue that Washington must end the blockade before meaningful progress can occur. At the same time, the enrichment dispute remains a major obstacle to diplomacy. Although both sides show little willingness to compromise, the IAEA continues monitoring Iran’s facilities. Since the agency has not reported any violations, Tehran says its program remains peaceful. However, the U.S. still views uranium enrichment as a potential threat.
International experts continue debating the issue. Some analysts argue that Iran has the legal right to enrich uranium under international agreements. Others believe enrichment levels should remain limited to reduce proliferation risks. Nevertheless, the IAEA verifies compliance with safeguards rather than setting enrichment caps. Therefore, Iran maintains that no enrichment limit exists beyond international monitoring requirements.
The coming months will likely test diplomatic efforts further, and Pakistan may attempt additional mediation. European countries could also play a larger role in negotiations. Even so, the enrichment issue will remain central to any future agreement. For now, a resolution appears unlikely because both sides continue defending firm positions.