The Dispute Over “Negotiation Foundations” — The U.S. and Iran Each Insist on Their Own Story, With Completely Opposite Narratives

Ahead of the upcoming U.S.-Iran talks in Islamabad, both sides have fallen into a stalemate of “talking past each other” over the “negotiation foundations.” The White House claims the U.S. accepts Iran’s “revised and simplified plan,” while Iran’s Speaker of Parliament says that three of the ten ceasefire clauses have already been violated, and that the negotiations “make no sense.” One side says “progress has been made,” while the other claims “the foundation has been destroyed.” Even before the talks begin, both sides are already standing on completely different narrative starting points.

1. Iranian Speaker of Parliament: Before the Talks Begin, Three Key Clauses Have Already Been Violated

Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Baqer Qalibaf said in a statement posted on social media on the 8th that negotiations between Iran and the U.S. have not yet started, and that 3 of the 10 ceasefire clauses proposed by Iran have already been violated. The statement stressed that Iran’s “deep-rooted” distrust of the U.S. comes from the U.S.’ repeated violations of commitments of various forms; unfortunately, this situation is repeating itself again.

According to Qalibaf, the items that were violated include three: first, regarding a ceasefire in Lebanon — Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz had previously announced that Iran, the U.S., and the allies of both countries agreed to an immediate ceasefire in all regions including Lebanon, “with immediate effect”; second, prohibiting violations of Iranian airspace — the Iranian Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps intercepted and shot down a drone over the city of Lar in Fars Province that day; third, accepting Iran’s uranium enrichment activities.

Qalibaf emphasized that this negotiation-foundation framework had been openly violated even before the U.S.-Iran talks had started; “in this situation, neither a ceasefire nor negotiations make any sense.”

2. The White House: What the U.S. Accepts Is the “Revised and Simplified Plan”

In stark contrast to Iran’s position, the White House offered a completely different account. U.S. White House Press Secretary Leavitt announced at a press briefing on the 8th that the U.S. and Iran will hold their first round of talks in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, on the morning of the 11th local time.

Leavitt said Iran’s initial 10-point proposal is “unacceptable,” and then Iran put forward a “more reasonable, more concise simplified plan.” President Trump and his team believe that this revised new plan “can serve as a basis for negotiations” and can align with the U.S.’ 15-point plan. She also emphasized that Trump’s “red line” requiring Iran to stop uranium enrichment has not changed, and the claim that Trump would accept an “aspirational list”-style agreement from Iran is “utterly absurd.”

Regarding the “negotiation foundation,” Leavitt made it clear that the so-called “10-point ceasefire plan” circulating externally is not the negotiation foundation the U.S. is accepting. What Iran submitted is a “revised and entirely different simplified plan,” which “can serve as a basis for negotiations,” and it will be aligned with the “15-point plan” proposed by the U.S.

3. Trump’s Remarks: Closed-Door Negotiations, Excluding “Interference”

Trump himself also weighed in on the negotiation process. He wrote that many people who have nothing to do with the U.S./Iran negotiations are sending all kinds of agreements, lists, and letters, and in many cases “they are complete frauds, streetwise operators, and even worse.” Trump said that “only a set of ‘terms’ that make sense to the U.S. is acceptable, and we will discuss these behind closed doors during the negotiations,” and said these points are the basis for agreeing to a ceasefire.

What this statement signals is that Trump wants to push the negotiations forward in a closed-door environment without outside interference, while also downplaying all kinds of interpretations by outsiders of Iran’s “ten-point plan”—regardless of whether those interpretations are accurate.

At the same time, Trump continues to exert pressure outside the negotiations. He posted on social media that any country that provides military weapons to Iran will immediately impose a 50% tariff on all goods it sells to the U.S., effective immediately with no exceptions or exemptions.

4. Negotiation Team Announced, But a “Dual Version” Appears in the Timing

On the schedule for the negotiations, there is also disagreement between the U.S. and Iran. Iran’s Supreme National Security Council previously said that talks would begin in Islamabad on April 10 and last for two weeks. However, the White House announced that the first round of talks will be held on the morning of the 11th local time, with the U.S. Vice President Vance leading the negotiation team; team members also include the Middle East envoy Wittekov and Trump’s son-in-law Kushner, and in the coming two weeks they will be conducted in a closed-door manner.

Iran’s side confirmed that Parliament Speaker Qalibaf will lead the Iranian delegation to take part in the talks, but insiders said that the final choice for the head of the Iranian team has not yet been finalized.

A follow-up report from Jin10 Data also disclosed a thought-provoking detail: the ceasefire agreement has “yin-yang versions”—the Persian version contains uranium enrichment clauses, while the English version does not. This information further confirms the huge divergence between the two sides on the negotiation foundations: even the text content of the agreement may not be on the same document.

Summary: The White House says the U.S. accepts Iran’s “simplified plan,” while Iran’s Speaker of Parliament says three of the ten clauses have already been violated; the U.S. says the negotiation foundation is the “revised plan,” while Iran says “the negotiations are meaningless.” The U.S. announces talks on the 11th, while Iran previously announced they would begin on the 10th… The talks have not yet officially kicked off, and both sides are already standing at two completely different narrative starting points. At the Islamabad negotiation table on April 11, what needs to be filled is not only the disagreement over clauses, but also the fundamental rift in both sides’ understanding of the entire negotiation foundation.
#Gate廣場四月發帖挑戰