Senior Iranian source disputes reports of a 60-day ceasefire extension, saying Tehran considers the interim agreement already violated
TEHRAN: Iran has denied holding discussions with the United States about extending their ceasefire, with a senior Iranian source saying Tehran believes the interim agreement had no defined ceasefire period requiring an extension.
The comments, reported by Reuters on Wednesday, contradicted an Anadolu report citing Pakistani government sources that Washington and Tehran had agreed to extend a 60-day ceasefire under their June interim agreement.
“There is no talk of an extension,” the Iranian source said, arguing that Washington violated the agreement shortly after it was reached and subsequently withdrew from it.
Tehran Disputes Interpretation of 60-Day Period
The June agreement called for an immediate and permanent end to military operations. However, it quickly unravelled as tensions between the two countries resurfaced.
US President Donald Trump declared the agreement “over” on July 7, while Iran’s Foreign Ministry announced its suspension about a week later.
Importantly, the Iranian source said the agreement’s 60-day provision did not define the duration of the ceasefire. Instead, it established an extendable negotiating period during which both countries were expected to pursue a final agreement addressing Iran’s nuclear programme and US sanctions.
Iran Sets Conditions for Renewed Negotiations
Meanwhile, Tehran has outlined several requirements before returning fully to negotiations. These reportedly include a ceasefire in Lebanon, freedom of navigation in the Gulf and waivers allowing Iran to export oil.
The source said mediators were discussing whether Washington could return to the interim agreement and establish a timeframe for implementing commitments.
However, the Iranian official said those discussions had produced no progress.
The conflicting accounts highlight continuing uncertainty surrounding diplomatic efforts involving Iran, the United States and regional mediators.
Consequently, while intermediaries continue exchanging messages between Washington and Tehran, the two governments appear to differ fundamentally over the status and interpretation of the June agreement.
