Iran Prepares Counterproposal as Trump Weighs Strikes

Nuclear tensions between the United States and Iran have reached a new diplomatic and military crossroads. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi stated that a draft counterproposal would be ready within a few days following indirect contacts held in Geneva, while U.S. President Donald Trump announced that military options remain on the table.

Trump Signals 10–15 Day Deadline and Military Option

U.S. President Donald Trump announced that he had given Tehran 10 to 15 days to resolve the longstanding nuclear dispute. Warning that “really bad things” could happen otherwise, Trump said he was considering a limited military strike at a time when the United States continues its military buildup in the Middle East.

Responding to reporters’ questions at the White House, Trump said, “I guess I can say I am considering it.” Later, at a press conference, he added that Iran “better negotiate a fair deal.”

Two U.S. officials stated that military planning had reached an advanced stage, with potential scenarios including targeting specific individuals and, if ordered by Trump, options aimed at pursuing leadership change in Tehran.

Geneva Contacts and “Guiding Principles”

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said that indirect talks were held this week in Geneva with Trump’s Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law Jared Kushner. Araqchi noted that the sides had reached an understanding on the main “guiding principles,” but stressed that this did not mean a final agreement was imminent.

In an interview with MS NOW, Araqchi said a draft counterproposal could be ready within two to three days for review by senior Iranian officials, adding that new U.S.-Iran contacts could take place in about a week. However, he cautioned that any military action would complicate diplomatic efforts.

Enrichment Debate and Confidence-Building Measures

Referring to the Geneva discussions, Araqchi said the United States had not demanded “zero uranium enrichment,” and Iran had not offered to suspend enrichment. He emphasized that the core issue is ensuring that Iran’s nuclear program remains permanently peaceful.

“What we are now talking about is how to make sure that Iran’s nuclear program — including enrichment — is peaceful and would remain peaceful forever,” he said.

Araqchi added that technical and political “confidence-building measures” were being discussed to guarantee the peaceful nature of the program, in exchange for steps on sanctions, though he provided no further details. The White House reiterated that the president’s position is clear: Iran cannot have nuclear weapons or the capacity to build them and cannot enrich uranium.

Protests, Execution Claims and Conflicting Figures

Trump also addressed the recent crackdown on protests in Iran, stating that a distinction should be made between the Iranian people and the country’s leadership. He claimed that “32,000 people were killed over a relatively short period of time,” acknowledging that the figures could not be independently verified.

He further alleged that the Iranian leadership had planned to execute 837 people two weeks ago, but abandoned those plans following his warning.

The U.S.-based human rights monitoring group HRANA reported 7,114 verified deaths and said another 11,700 cases are under review. Araqchi, however, stated that the Iranian government had published a “comprehensive list” putting the death toll at 3,117, adding: “If anyone doubts the accuracy of our data, they should speak with evidence.”

United Nations Calls for Diplomacy

United Nations spokesperson Stephane Dujarric reiterated concerns over escalating rhetoric and increased military activity in the region. Calling on both sides to continue diplomatic engagement, Dujarric emphasized that differences should be resolved through negotiations.

Tensions had already surged in June following U.S. and Israeli strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities and certain military sites, and further intensified in January when Trump renewed threats of military action. The latest developments suggest that the line between diplomacy and military confrontation is becoming increasingly narrow.