Al Arabiya English, on Iran, 20 October 2026

3.0out of 10Minor

Iran rules out transferring enriched nuclear material abroad amid US tensions

Findings are available in the analysis below.1 finding

Iran ’s security chief Mohsen Rezaei on Tuesday told the visiting Pakistani army chief Asim Munir that Tehran would not allow nuclear material to leave the country, according to state TV. “Not even a tiny bit of enriched nuclear material will leave Iran; such materials constitute a major asset and national wealth for the Iranian people, intended for use within the country,” said Rezaei, Iran’s secretary of the Supreme National Security Council.

“There will be no negotiations until America takes steps to build trust – a process that must begin with the fulfilment of Iran’s conditions,” he added. For all the latest headlines follow our Google News channel online or via the app. Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian also rejected the idea of negotiations under US threats during his meeting with Munir, who is in Tehran as part of a renewed push to mediate a peace deal between Iran and the United States.

“The Americans must first remove the threats and sanctions; only then can we engage in dialogue,” he said. “Today, our nation does not trust America. It believes that if we enter the negotiations, they (the Americans) will attack us again.” Iran’s chief negotiator and parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf made similar remarks to Munir. “We have nothing new to say; America cannot gain Iran’s trust unless it fulfils the seven conditions,” said Ghalibaf, noting that “threats and military maneuvers cannot influence Iran’s strategic decisions.”

Iran has demanded, among other things, a ceasefire across the Middle East, the unfreezing of its assets abroad and the lifting of sanctions on its oil sector. The Middle East war was sparked in late February by the United States and Israel when they launched a wave of surprise attacks on Iran, while Washington and Tehran were in the midst of negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. The warring parties agreed a memorandum of understanding in June that was expected to create a framework for a permanent resolution to the conflict, but the deal did not last long.

Left out here: Drops what it reported before

The article says the June memorandum 'did not last long' but never says what followed. Al Arabiya reported a month earlier that after the deal collapsed, US forces resumed strikes on Iranian sites and oil vessels and kept up a naval blockade. Without that, Pezeshkian's fear that the Americans 'will attack us again' reads as suspicion rather than a reference to strikes that happened after the last deal.

How we know

Negotiations have effectively been at an impasse since then, and recent indirect talks between the US and Iran on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly failed to produce a breakthrough. Tehran had previously maintained it would not hand over its nuclear materials – enriched to 60 percent, close to the atomic bomb threshold of 90 percent – to any country but had hinted at the possibility of diluting them within Iran’s borders. Washington and its allies have imposed waves of sanctions on Iran, accusing it of seeking to build nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has long denied.

Read more: Iran says US responsible for ‘insecurity’ in Strait of Hormuz Advertisement Advertisement

Read the original article on english.alarabiya.net (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

Al Arabiya reports that Iran's security chief, president and parliament speaker told Pakistan's army chief that enriched material will not leave Iran and that talks depend on US trust-building steps. The article attributes each claim, names the United States and Israel as the side that launched the war, and reports the weapons charge as Washington's accusation with Tehran's denial. Nothing in it misleads. The one small gap is that it says the June deal 'did not last long' without repeating its own earlier report that US forces resumed strikes after it collapsed.

  1. Drops what it reported before

    Minor

    What is missing

    The article says the June memorandum 'did not last long' but never says what followed. Al Arabiya reported a month earlier that after the deal collapsed, US forces resumed strikes on Iranian sites and oil vessels and kept up a naval blockade. Without that, Pezeshkian's fear that the Americans 'will attack us again' reads as suspicion rather than a reference to strikes that happened after the last deal.

    How we know

    Show where it belongs

What it gets right

  • “sparked in late February by the United States and Israel when they launched a wave of surprise attacks on Iran, while Washington and Tehran were in the midst of negotiations”

    The outlet names who started the war, in the active voice, and adds that the attack came during negotiations.

  • “accusing it of seeking to build nuclear weapons, a charge Tehran has long denied”

    The weapons claim is reported as Washington's accusation, with Iran's denial beside it, not as the outlet's own fact.

  • “according to state TV”

    The outlet tells the reader where the account of the meeting comes from.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Al Arabiya English

  1. 22 OctIran warns US data centers, AI facilities could be targeted if war resumes0.0
  2. 22 OctIran’s IRGC threaten to hit US bases in retaliation for Hormuz escorts3.0
  3. 22 OctTrump says something will happen regarding Iran ‘fairly soon’ 3.0
  4. 21 OctBaghdad closes border crossing with Iran under US pressure: Iraqi sources3.0
  5. 20 OctIran says three tankers hit mines crossing Hormuz 3.0

Everything we scored from Al Arabiya English