The year 2025 is shaping up to be a critical one for Iran’s nuclear programme and its relations with the West. After years of limited diplomatic engagement and significant advancements in Tehran’s nuclear capabilities, the international community now faces urgent decisions that could shape the Middle East’s security landscape for decades. With high-stakes negotiations and crucial deadlines coming up, the months ahead promise to be pivotal in shaping the trajectory of Iran’s nuclear ambitions. As Iran is on the back foot at the moment following the setbacks it faced in the ongoing Middle East conflict, the West sees an opening, especially as a reform-minded president is in office in Tehran.
Iran’s nuclear programme has been a focal point of international tension for decades, which led to the 2015 nuclear deal, with US President Barack Obama playing a key role. The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), signed between Iran and six world powers—the US, the UK, France, Russia, China and Germany—imposed strict limits on Tehran’s nuclear activities in exchange for relief from economic sanctions. However, the deal unravelled in 2018 when the Donald Trump administration unilaterally withdrew, reimposing harsh sanctions. In response, Iran gradually abandoned its commitment to the JCPOA terms, significantly increasing uranium enrichment and advancing nuclear technology.
At present, Iran enriches uranium to 60 per cent purity—far above the 3.67 per cent cap agreed upon under the JCPOA, though still below the 90 per cent required for weapons-grade material. It has also developed advanced centrifuges and expanded key facilities such as Natanz and Fordow, edging closer to acquiring military-grade nuclear capabilities. Tehran continues to insist that its nuclear ambitions are purely peaceful, citing a religious fatwa prohibiting nuclear weapons. Nevertheless, its actions have triggered alarm globally.
The international response has been fragmented and largely ineffectual. The United States and Europe have maintained sanctions, but diplomatic efforts have largely stalled. Meanwhile, other geopolitical crises, such as Russia’s war in Ukraine and the Gaza war, have diverted Western attention, leaving Iran’s nuclear advancements to proceed with limited oversight or intervention.
Against this backdrop, a fresh round of nuclear talks is scheduled to begin in Geneva on January 13. These discussions will involve Iran and the three European signatories of the JCPOA—France, the UK and Germany. The talks follow a contentious November meeting where the European powers criticised Iran’s growing stockpile of high-enriched uranium and its insufficient cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).
Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi has indicated Tehran’s willingness to negotiate, but warned against western “pressure tactics”. Similarly, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has emphasised that diplomacy must be based on mutual respect, pointing to Iran’s missile and defence capabilities as factors that compel serious negotiations.
One of the most pressing concerns is the October 18 deadline for the activation of the JCPOA’s “snapback” mechanism. This provision enables signatories to reimpose all pre-deal sanctions on Iran, a move that could profoundly impact the country’s nuclear programme and its relations with the global community.
Iran has warned that it would respond to the activation of the snapback mechanism by withdrawing from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, a move that could escalate tensions to unprecedented levels. Such an action might provoke a military confrontation, particularly with Israel, which has consistently signalled its intent to take out Iran’s nuclear facilities. On the other hand, should Western powers opt against activating the snapback, they risk sending a message to Tehran that it can continue its nuclear activities with impunity.
Iran’s nuclear ambitions cannot be viewed in isolation but are deeply tied to its broader security strategy and regional influence. As a key member of the Axis of Resistance—an alliance that includes Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and Shia militias in Iraq—Iran uses its military capabilities to project power across the Middle East. However, the ongoing Middle East conflict has revealed vulnerabilities in Iran’s capabilities and placed significant strain on its regional proxies. Hamas is now fighting for survival, a weakened Hezbollah has signed a ceasefire deal with Israel and the pro-Iran Assad regime has been overthrown in Syria.
These developments, coupled with Israel’s increasing military assertiveness, could prompt Iran to reconsider its policy of nuclear ambiguity. A nuclear deterrent might appear more attractive as a safeguard against perceived threats from Israel and the United States. However, this strategy risks triggering pre-emptive action from Israel, which views a nuclear-armed Iran as an existential threat.
The return of Trump to the White House introduces an additional layer of complexity. During his first term, Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign, marked by severe economic sanctions and diplomatic isolation, significantly strained ties with Iran. However, Trump’s 2024 campaign included signals of a willingness to negotiate, with the former president stating, “We have to make a deal because the consequences are impossible.”
Iran’s newly elected president, Masoud Pezeshkian, too, has adopted a pragmatic approach, recognising that economic relief is contingent upon re-engaging with the West. This alignment of interests could create a narrow window for diplomatic progress. Nonetheless, the path forward remains fraught with challenges. Trust between Iran and the West is at an all-time low, and any agreement will require substantial compromises on both sides.
The IAEA continues to play a vital role in monitoring Iran’s nuclear activities. Director General Rafael Grossi has frequently raised alarms about Iran’s accelerating enrichment efforts, describing them as “nearing weapons-grade levels”. While Iran maintains a degree of cooperation with the IAEA, it is yet to fully implement the agency’s roadmap for resolving outstanding issues.
Recent statements from the IAEA and European powers highlight the urgency of the situation. In December 2024, the E3 accused Iran of amassing high-enriched uranium to “unprecedented levels” without any credible civilian justification. This erosion of trust complicates efforts to revive the JCPOA or to negotiate a new agreement.
A return to the JCPOA or the establishment of a new agreement could provide a pathway to de-escalation, rolling back Iran’s nuclear advancements in exchange for sanctions relief. However, achieving such an outcome will require overcoming deep-seated mistrust and addressing the reality that Iran’s technical knowledge of advanced enrichment processes cannot simply be undone. Failure to reach an agreement could lead to a dangerous escalation. The probability of Iran crossing the 90 per cent enrichment threshold—whether intentionally or inadvertently—grows with each passing day. Such a development would likely provoke a strong response from Israel and possibly the US, raising the spectre of a broader regional conflict.
