Also available in Persian — نسخه فارسی EN فا
❓ Unknown

Baeidi-Nejad Denies 'Secret Negotiations Between Iran and the U.S.' in London

Jan 25, 2026 January 25, 2026 3 min read 📰 Radio Farda
📋 Key Takeaway

Hamid Baeidi-Nejad, Iran's ambassador to Britain, denied claims of secret negotiations between Iranian and U.S. diplomats in London, labeling the reports as false. The discussions were reportedly mediated by Oman and European countries, with concerns over domestic political implications for both sides. This incident highlights ongoing tensions and the complexities of U.S.-Iran relations.

🔍 Quick Context Guide
💡 Bottom Line: Iran denies reports of secret U.S. talks, highlighting ongoing diplomatic tensions.

👥 Key Players

Hamid Baeidi-Nejad MENTIONED
Iran's Ambassador to Britain
"As a senior diplomat, he represents Iran's official stance in the UK and is involved in managing diplomatic relations."
Oman MENTIONED
Mediator
"Oman often acts as a neutral mediator in Middle Eastern conflicts and has historically facilitated dialogue between Iran and the U.S."
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei MENTIONED
Supreme Leader of Iran
"He holds the ultimate authority in Iran and his stance on negotiations with the U.S. significantly influences Iranian policy."

📰 What Happened

Iran's ambassador to Britain denied reports of secret negotiations between Iranian and U.S. diplomats in London, as reported by a Kuwaiti newspaper. The alleged talks were said to be mediated by Oman and European countries.

  • The Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida claimed secret negotiations took place in London.
  • Iran's ambassador called the report a 'pure fabrication' on Twitter.

💡 Why It Matters

🇮🇷 For Iran: Denials of such negotiations help maintain the government's stance against open talks with the U.S., which is a sensitive domestic issue.
🌍 Regional: Any potential negotiations could impact regional stability, particularly concerning conflicts like the one in Yemen.
🌐 International: Secret talks, if true, could signal a shift in U.S.-Iran relations, affecting international diplomatic strategies and sanctions policies.

📚 Background

U.S.-Iran relations have been fraught with tension, with secret negotiations occasionally occurring despite public denials. Historical instances include the Iran-Contra affair.

U.S.-Iran relations Yemen conflict
📡 Source: INTERNATIONAL
📊 Confidence: 70%
The report originates from a Kuwaiti newspaper, which may have regional biases; Iranian denial suggests a need for cautious interpretation.

Iran's ambassador to Britain has denied a report by a Kuwaiti newspaper about a secret meeting between diplomats from the Islamic Republic and the United States in London, mediated by Oman and some European countries. Hamid Baeidi-Nejad called the news a 'pure fabrication' on his Twitter account on Friday. The Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Jarida reported, citing an unnamed European source, that several Iranian and American diplomats traveled to London with regular passports and negotiated in a hotel. According to the newspaper, these negotiations were mediated by Oman and some European countries, and one of the results of these talks was peace between the parties involved in Yemen. Iran has welcomed the ceasefire between the parties involved in the Yemeni war. The Islamic Republic supports the Shia Houthi group, which controls the capital of Yemen. Al-Jarida also reported that the parties are concerned about the leak of news regarding these secret negotiations and its impact on their domestic politics. According to the report, European mediators have convinced Tehran and Washington that without an official announcement, 12 U.S. conditions and eight Iranian demands could be implemented. The newspaper did not specify the eight Iranian demands. Previously, Iranian and American officials have negotiated secretly multiple times. For instance, in the final years of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency, deputy foreign ministers of both countries held confidential talks in Oman. Prior to that, there were also secret negotiations between officials of the two countries, the most famous of which was the visit of Robert McFarlane, the U.S. National Security Advisor during Ronald Reagan's presidency, to Iran, which later became known as 'Iran-gate.' Despite these secret negotiations, discussing open negotiations with the U.S. is considered a taboo in the Islamic Republic. Donald Trump, the President of the United States, spoke in early July about Washington's desire to negotiate unconditionally with Tehran, but Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the leader of the Islamic Republic, declared that negotiations with the U.S. were forbidden. Hassan Rouhani, the President of Iran, claimed on Tuesday, December 4, that U.S. officials had indirectly requested negotiations with Tehran eight times last year and three times this year, but the Islamic Republic rejected them. In July, over a hundred political and civil activists inside and outside Iran issued a statement calling for 'direct and unconditional negotiations' between Iran and the U.S., referencing the 'global' welcome for the meeting between the U.S. President and the North Korean leader and the 'dangerous situation in the region.' This statement drew severe criticism from close associates of the leader of the Islamic Republic and officials of Hassan Rouhani's government. The foreign ministers of Iran and the U.S. directly negotiated for the first time since the severance of relations between the two countries during Hassan Rouhani's presidency. However, the leader of the Islamic Republic stated that the subject of these negotiations was only the nuclear agreement, and Iran would not negotiate with the U.S. on other issues. In 2007, during Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's presidency, Hossein Kazemi Qomi and Ryan Crocker, the ambassadors of Iran and the U.S. in Iraq, also negotiated directly with each other.

🌐

Translated from the original and edited for English readers. View original source →

Translation confidence: 85%

📰 Related Coverage

⚖️ Independent Platform — Artesh.com is not affiliated with any government, military, or political organization. Editorial Policy →