PARIS/DUBAI (Reuters) – European allies fear an inexperienced U.S. negotiating team is pushing for a swift, headline‑grabbing framework deal with Iran that could entrench rather than resolve deeper problems, diplomats with past experience dealing with Tehran said.
They worry Washington, eager to claim a diplomatic win for President Donald Trump, could lock in a superficial agreement on Iran’s nuclear programme and sanctions relief, then struggle through months or years of technically complex follow‑on talks.
“The concern isn’t that there won’t be an agreement,” said a senior European diplomat, one of eight who spoke to Reuters who have previously worked on the nuclear file or continue to do so. “It’s that there will be a bad initial agreement that creates endless downstream problems.”
Responding to a series of questions from Reuters, ranging from negotiating style and team to objectives and the potential dangers of a quick deal, the White House rejected the criticism.
“President Trump has a proven track record of achieving good deals on behalf of the United States and the American people, and he will only accept one that puts America first,” spokeswoman Anna Kelly said.
Diplomats from France, Britain and Germany — which began negotiating with Iran in 2003 — say they have been sidelined.
From 2013 to 2015, the three worked with the United States to secure a deal on curbing Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
Trump withdrew from the accord – the signature foreign policy agreement of his predecessor Barack Obama – in 2018, during his first term, calling it “horribly one-sided”.
After 40 days of airstrikes, U.S. and Iranian negotiators opened talks in Islamabad earlier this month, again focused on the familiar trade‑off of nuclear restrictions for economic relief. There were some signs in the Pakistani capital on Sunday of preparations for a resumption of face-to-face negotiations.
Diplomats say deep mistrust and sharply different negotiating styles raise the risk of a fragile framework neither side can sustain politically.
