Iran Firmly Rejects US Uranium Enrichment Demand, Adopts Dual-Track Approach
In a significant development on Monday, February 9, 2026, Iran publicly rejected a core United States demand to cease all uranium enrichment activities. The Islamic Republic is now projecting a dual-track strategy that combines guarded diplomatic engagement with reinforced military preparedness, signaling a hardening stance amid ongoing regional tensions.
Diplomatic Deadlock and Conditional Offers
The moves follow indirect Tehran-Washington talks held in Muscat, Oman last week, which yielded no breakthrough. Mohammad Eslami, president of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, stated that while Iran could consider diluting its 60-percent enriched uranium, such action would only occur if all international sanctions were first lifted. "This issue depends on whether they will lift all sanctions in return," Iran's state news agency Irna quoted Eslami as saying. He further dismissed past proposals to ship the material abroad for safekeeping.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi echoed this position, reaffirming Tehran's strategy of engaging in talks while refusing to concede on what Iran views as sovereign rights. Both officials described the Muscat talks as a "good start" but warned that diplomacy must be based on "respect, not coercion."
Military Coordination and Increased Opacity
Simultaneously, Iran has signaled a shift toward greater military opacity and coordination. The Tehran-based Wana news agency reported a closed-door session held on Sunday, February 8, between the country's military chief and Araghchi, noting that the central message was "the full coordination between 'diplomacy and the field' within the decision-making structure" of Iran.
In a separate report on Sunday, Irna stated that the Defense Ministry has halted all public displays of new weaponry "for security reasons and to safeguard the principle of surprise," a move widely interpreted as preparing for potential conflict. This development coincides with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's televised speech on Monday, where he urged Iranians to show unity and "disappoint the enemy" ahead of the 47th anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Firm Positions from the US and Israel
Positions from the United States and Israel have appeared equally firm. A report on Sunday by Israel's Channel 15 indicated that the United States had privately messaged Iran, seeking "concessions" in the next round of talks and expecting "serious and meaningful content." On Monday, The Jerusalem Post, citing Israeli defense officials, reported that Israel has warned Washington it "will strike alone" if Iran crosses its "red lines" on ballistic missiles.
Prolonged Stalemate and Regional Implications
As Ali Larijani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, prepares to lead a delegation to mediator Oman on Tuesday, February 10, the diplomatic channel remains technically open. However, the fundamental mismatch of demands between Tehran and Washington, combined with visible military posturing, points not to an imminent deal but rather to a prolonged stalemate.
Amid continuously simmering tensions in the Middle East, the US Department of Transportation issued a new advisory on Monday to all US-flagged commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, asking them to stay far away from Iran's territorial sea in case Iranian forces seek to board.
Analytical Perspectives on the Impasse
The somewhat "deadlocked" situation has been captured by several media outlets. An analysis published Monday by the Middle East Forum Observer noted the increasingly narrow path forward, describing the US demand for Iran's zero enrichment as a "maximalist position" Tehran could not accept. It added that Iran likely views concessions on missiles or regional proxies as an "existential danger," explaining why both sides are talking while actively preparing for the talks' failure.
The Conversation echoed this opinion in an analysis published Monday, noting that Washington's "opening demands are often maximalist by design," intended to create leverage rather than define an achievable endpoint. "The risk lies in treating these demands as simultaneously attainable," it said, adding that from Tehran's view, "the issues are not equivalent."
