‘Iran Didn’t Want a Result’: Was Tehran Just Playing with Germany’s Foreign Minister Wadephul?

Geneva, Switzerland – When German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul sat down across from his Iranian counterpart Abbas Araghchi at the Intercontinental Hotel on Friday, the world watched with cautious optimism. Alongside representatives from France, the UK, and the EU’s Vice President Kaja Kallas, Wadephul had one clear mission: to de-escalate the dangerous tensions between Israel and Iran by reviving nuclear diplomacy.

But four hours later, the talks ended with no concrete results. And according to political experts and analysts, it may have all been a calculated performance by Iran.

A Tense Diplomatic Effort

Wadephul’s goal going into the meeting was straightforward yet ambitious: secure Iranian commitment to end uranium enrichment and restart meaningful nuclear negotiations, ideally paving the way toward peace in the Middle East. Backed quietly by the US and Israel, the German-led diplomatic effort was meant to fill the vacuum of active engagement amid rising fears of regional war.

“Iran must show serious readiness to talk,” Wadephul said before the meeting. “The ball is now in Iran’s court.”

Yet Iran quickly made its position clear: No negotiation would proceed unless Israeli military aggression stopped. Foreign Minister Araghchi repeated Tehran’s line that Europe’s failure to restrain Israel made diplomacy impossible, effectively derailing any potential progress before it even began.

Was Iran Ever Serious?

Too many observers, this wasn’t a failure — it was a predictable trap.

“Iran was clearly not interested in a result,” said Carsten Ovens, director of the European Leadership Network (ELNET). “They are playing with the West and stalling for time.”

Ovens argued that the Geneva talks were less about diplomacy and more about buying time for Iran’s nuclear programme, which, according to Western intelligence, has continued expanding despite past agreements. “Iran’s strategy is consistent,” he warned. “Delay, deflect, and advance.”

The idea that Iran is simply using diplomacy as a pressure management tool is not new. For years, Tehran has faced accusations of exploiting negotiation windows to ease sanctions while continuing to enrich uranium and develop ballistic missiles — activities directly prohibited under the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

A Deep Divide Within Germany

Wadephul’s initiative was met with mixed reactions at home. Chancellor Friedrich Merz, also of the CDU party, gave tentative support, stating: “We want to make our diplomatic contribution to peace.”

Yet many within the CDU/CSU coalition were not convinced. Some saw the talks as naive, arguing that diplomatic gestures give Iran legitimacy it does not deserve.

CDU foreign policy veteran Roderich Kiesewetter voiced strong criticism: “What are we negotiating about? Iran continues to pursue the destruction of Israel and builds nuclear weapons in underground facilities. These negotiations only help Iran, not the international community.”

His colleague Norbert Röttgen went further: “Tehran has been deceiving Europe for years. These talks are not about peace — they’re about gaining time, leverage, and concessions.”

A Broader Strategy of Delay?

Many experts agree with this assessment. Iran’s refusal to even consider talks while Israel continues to retaliate against Iranian-backed aggression reflects a deliberate hardline strategy — not an earnest interest in peace.

“Iran wants the world to view it as a victim of aggression,” says Ovens. “But in reality, it is pursuing offensive capabilities and deepening its regional influence through proxies like Hezbollah and the Houthis.”

The nuclear programme, in this context, serves both as a deterrent and leverage point. By keeping the international community guessing, Iran maintains pressure without committing to any real change — a strategy honed since the collapse of the JCPOA under former US President Donald Trump.

Meanwhile, Israel continues to signal that it will act unilaterally, if necessary, to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Defence Minister Israel Katz has already declared Israel’s readiness to destroy hardened nuclear sites — with or without American support.

The Fallout of Failed Talks

Wadephul, for his part, tried to frame the meeting in positive terms: “The good result today is that we left the room with the impression that the Iranian side is basically prepared to continue talking.”

But even that modest optimism was swiftly undermined. Within hours, Araghchi clarified: “We will not negotiate with any party while Israeli attacks continue.”

This firm stance, coupled with Tehran’s insistence that Europe must stop supporting Israel, leaves little room for maneuver.

German-Iranian MP Bijan Djir-Sarai called the entire diplomatic approach “hopeless,” adding: “Without the USA and Israel at the table, these talks are irrelevant. The EU’s adherence to old strategies like the JCPOA is misguided.”

Conclusion: What Next for Europe and the Middle East?

The failed talks in Geneva offer a sobering lesson for European diplomacy. Despite best intentions, Iran showed no willingness to compromise, and many fear it’s simply buying time to complete its nuclear ambitions.

As tensions between Israel and Iran continue to escalate, and the US weighs possible intervention, the question remains: Can diplomacy still play a role, or has Tehran made up its mind?

With Iran doubling down and Germany’s foreign policy fractured, the EU must now reassess its strategy — not based on hope, but on hard realities.

As Carsten Ovens aptly summarised: “Iran is not negotiating in good faith. They are negotiating for time. And the West may be running out of it.”

Meta Description:
German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul’s high-stakes nuclear talks with Iran ended in failure. Was Iran ever serious about negotiating — or was this another strategic delay tactic?

Iran nuclear talks, Johann Wadephul, Israel-Iran conflict, Geneva negotiations, EU foreign policy, Carsten Ovens, Iranian nuclear programme, Abbas Araghchi, JCPOA, European diplomacy