Araghchi and Barrot Meet in Paris Amid Rising Nuclear Tensions
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met his French counterpart Jean-Noël Barrot on November 26 in Paris.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met his French counterpart Jean-Noël Barrot on November 26 in Paris. This renewed contact comes only days after the IAEA Board of Governors passed a resolution demanding full cooperation from Tehran, which triggered protests from Iranian officials.
Araghchi traveled to Paris following his participation in the annual meeting of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) in The Hague. France announced that the discussions will focus on regional developments, Iran’s nuclear program, and bilateral relations, while Iran added that the fate of Iranian citizen Mahdieh Esfandiari in France will also be addressed. At the same time, France has stated that the situation of its two nationals released from Evin Prison but barred from leaving Iran will also be on the agenda, indicating that prisoner-related issues remain deeply intertwined with broader negotiations.
The meeting follows weeks of continued friction. After the IAEA resolution was adopted last Friday, Iran reacted strongly, with Araghchi accusing the United States, France, the United Kingdom, and Germany of “escalating tensions.” The resolution demands that Iran immediately restore comprehensive cooperation with the IAEA, clarify the status of its enriched uranium stockpile, and grant inspectors access to nuclear sites that were attacked by Israel and the United States during the June 12-day conflict. Iran has refused access to these sites since the attacks, arguing that the facilities remain damaged and claiming that enrichment activities are currently halted.
This deterioration has effectively nullified the Cairo Agreement, a cooperation protocol negotiated on September 9 between Araghchi and IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, under Egyptian mediation. Iran declared the Cairo arrangement “void and terminated” following both the wartime attacks and the activation of the “snapback” mechanism on September 14. Araghchi stated repeatedly that the Cairo agreement “no longer has functionality or relevance under the current conditions.” Grossi, speaking in Manila on Tuesday, stressed that the IAEA nevertheless intends to “re-enter full engagement with Iran and restore inspection activities,” highlighting a widening gap between the two sides.
In this environment, Iran’s decision to reopen dialogue with Europe appears cautious but deliberate. Ali Larijani, Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, emphasized that Iran will only participate in ‘real, not artificial’ negotiations, warning that diplomacy must not be predetermined or imposed. His comments reflect internal debates in Tehran about whether meaningful progress is possible with Western powers, particularly after the 12-day war and the attacks on nuclear facilities.
Iran insists that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapon and rejects U.S. demands for zero enrichment, calling them “absolutely unacceptable.” Meanwhile, Western governments and the IAEA remain concerned about over 400 kilograms of Iran’s high-enriched uranium, the status of which has become a central issue. Many have suggested that the stockpile was buried by the U.S. bombing of Iranian nuclear facilities, though some uncertainty remains. Reports suggest that enrichment activities at damaged facilities have paused, a claim echoed by Iranian government spokesperson Fatemeh Mohajerani, who stated that “due to the damage inflicted on Iran’s nuclear processes, the country is currently unable to conduct enrichment.” Western officials, however, continue to demand clarity regarding Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.
The Paris meeting marks one of the first instances in months in which Iran is engaging in public and direct nuclear-related discussions with a Western government. In recent months, Qatar and Oman attempted to revive back-channel contacts between Iran and the United States, but those efforts stalled following the latest IAEA resolution.
Despite Araghchi’s harsh criticism of France and other Western powers after the resolution, Iranian officials appear to recognize that engagement with Europe may be unavoidable. President Macron and Iranian leaders have maintained periodic contact in recent months, discussing nuclear issues and potential mechanisms for prisoner exchanges. A broader diplomatic calculation may also be at play: as the U.S. election cycle accelerates and uncertainty grows around Washington’s future Iran policy, Tehran may see value in maintaining open channels with European governments in case they can help prevent unwanted escalation.
At the same time, Iran’s approach remains defensive and cautious. The government continues to deny IAEA access to attacked sites and insists that cooperation with the agency now requires explicit authorization from the Supreme National Security Council under a newly passed parliamentary law titled “Obligation of the Iranian Government to Suspend Cooperation with the IAEA.” This legal constraint complicates any technical negotiations and positions Iran’s nuclear transparency firmly within the national security domain rather than diplomatic channels.
In parallel, domestic messaging in Tehran reflects frustration with the West’s perceived pressure tactics. Speaking to students at Bu-Ali Sina University, Araghchi reiterated that Iran “is ready for equal and honorable negotiations” but emphasized that “Iran has not had a good experience negotiating with the United States.” Former attempts by third-party mediators have yielded little momentum, and the latest IAEA decision further narrowed the diplomatic space.
This new phase of EU–Iran engagement is therefore fragile, high-stakes, and fraught with unresolved disputes. The Paris meeting could either open a narrow channel for de-escalation or reinforce the perception that Europe has aligned fully with U.S. pressure strategies. With the future of Iran’s nuclear program under unprecedented scrutiny, and with unresolved questions over uranium stockpiles, facility damage, prisoner issues, and the suspended Cairo framework, diplomacy faces significant obstacles.
Yet despite the sharp rhetoric and mutual distrust, both sides appear aware of the risks of further escalation. Iran faces mounting international pressure and potential economic repercussions if cooperation with the IAEA continues to decline. Europe, for its part, is concerned about regional security following the June conflict and seeks to prevent a broader nuclear crisis. Whether the Paris talks can move beyond symbolic engagement will depend on both parties’ willingness to balance pressure with diplomacy and to rebuild the basic trust required for any meaningful agreement.