Just a day after the United States and Iran signed a landmark memorandum of understanding (MoU) aimed at ending months of war and opening negotiations on Tehran’s nuclear programme, US vice president JD Vance unexpectedly postponed a planned trip to Switzerland, where the next phase of talks was expected to begin.
While the White House officially attributed the delay to “logistical” complications, developments on both sides suggest that the reasons go much deeper than scheduling challenges.
Official reason: Negotiations not ready
According to the White House, technical discussions between Washington and Tehran have not yet been finalised. Vance and the US delegation were reportedly prepared to leave for Switzerland, but the framework for the next round of negotiations remained incomplete.
“The logistics of these negotiations have never been simple or predictable,” a White House spokesperson said, adding that talks would begin “as soon as possible.”
Vance himself had hinted earlier that he was uncertain whether talks would start this week.
Iran appears reluctant to move quickly
The postponement came amid signs that Tehran was not ready to proceed with face-to-face negotiations.
Iranian media outlets, including Tasnim news agency, reported that Tehran wanted to see evidence that Washington was implementing its commitments under the agreement before sending negotiators to Switzerland. Iranian officials also cast doubt on the need for a formal signing ceremony after both presidents had already signed the deal.
Tasnim said there was “nothing confirmed” regarding an Iranian delegation travelling to Geneva, while Iranian negotiators indicated that implementation would need to begin before technical talks could advance.
Lebanon is emerging as a major sticking point
Another factor complicating the talks is Israel’s continuing military campaign in Lebanon.
The MoU calls for a permanent cessation of hostilities across all fronts, including Lebanon. However, Israeli air strikes reportedly continued in southern Lebanon after the agreement was signed, drawing criticism from Tehran.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Ismail Baghaei warned that the agreement could become “null and void” if commitments related to Lebanon’s sovereignty and Israeli withdrawal were not fulfilled. Iran’s leadership has repeatedly argued that any end to the conflict must apply across the entire region and not just between Washington and Tehran.
Reports also suggested Iran may have delayed its delegation partly because of dissatisfaction over Israel’s ongoing operations.
Rising political pressure in Washington
The delay also comes as the agreement faces criticism from some Republicans and foreign policy hawks in the US.
Critics argue that President Donald Trump gave Iran significant concessions, including sanctions relief and access to reconstruction funding, without securing enough guarantees on Tehran’s nuclear ambitions or regional activities.
Vance has become the administration’s chief public defender of the deal, repeatedly arguing that Iran must first demonstrate compliance before receiving broader economic benefits. His decision to remain in Washington may allow the administration to manage political fallout while negotiators work through unresolved issues behind the scenes.
What happens next?
The postponement does not appear to signal the collapse of the agreement. Both Washington and Tehran have publicly committed to continuing negotiations, and Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei has endorsed future direct talks despite expressing reservations about the deal.
However, Vance’s delayed trip highlights the fragility of the newly signed accord. Before substantive negotiations can begin, both sides will have to overcome disputes over implementation, Israeli actions in Lebanon, sanctions relief and the future of Iran’s nuclear programme.
