France's Macron Says Europe To Push Peace Plan To End Iran-Israel Conflict

In a diplomatic initiative, European powers are preparing to present Iran with a sweeping peace proposal aimed at ending its ongoing conflict with Israel, according to the Guardian. The plan, unveiled by French President Emmanuel Macron, would require Tehran to commit to halting all uranium enrichment, curbing its ballistic missile development, and ceasing financial support to militant groups operating across the Middle East.

The proposal marks one of the most expansive peace efforts by Europe in recent years, addressing not just Iran's nuclear ambitions but also the broader spectrum of regional instability linked to Tehran. However, the scope of the plan may complicate the chances of a swift resolution unless an interim deal can be struck to build trust and halt the current hostilities.

Among the ideas being discussed is a temporary freeze on uranium enrichment that would last for the duration of Donald Trump's presidency. Another more ambitious proposal would see a regional consortium, including Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates, take joint control of enrichment activities to prevent weaponisation.

Iran, a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), insists on its right to enrich uranium on its soil, a stance it says is legal under international law. But mounting international pressure, particularly in the wake of Israel's recent strikes, has intensified the calls for Tehran to compromise.

Macron shared the European position on Friday as foreign ministers from France, Germany, and the UK met Iranian deputy foreign minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva. It was Araghchi's first face-to-face meeting with Western diplomats since Israel launched a surprise offensive against Iranian targets last week.

Araghchi, who had earlier spoken by phone with US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, rejected any possibility of direct talks with the US while Israeli airstrikes continued. "In a situation where aggression ... continues, the Americans want negotiations and have sent messages several times, but we have clearly said that there is no room for dialogue until the aggression and aggressor stop. We have no talks with America as a partner in this crime."

The Geneva talks unfolded amid a tense week of retaliatory strikes between Iran and Israel, with Washington's role under heavy scrutiny. US President Trump, after days of ambiguous rhetoric, announced he would delay any decision on joining Israel's military campaign for at least two weeks, a move interpreted by Tehran as a sign of American unreliability.

European diplomats, meanwhile, have remained closely coordinated with Washington, even as they emphasise a more de-escalatory approach. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy met US Secretary of State Marco Rubio in Washington earlier in the week to align on potential red lines.

Macron laid out Europe's ambitious framework with a stern warning: "It's absolutely essential to prioritise a return to substantial negotiations, including nuclear negotiations to move towards zero [uranium] enrichment, ballistic negotiations to limit Iran's activities and capabilities, and the financing of all terrorist groups and destabilisation of the region that Iran has been carrying out for several years," he said.

He pointed specifically to Iran's heavily fortified Fordow enrichment facility, saying, "No one can seriously believe that this threat can be met with [Israel's] current operations alone. Why? Because there are some [nuclear] plants that are highly protected and because today no one knows exactly where's the uranium enriched to 60%. So we need to regain control on [Iran's nuclear] programme through technical expertise and negotiation."

In previous talks, the US has demanded a complete halt to Iran's domestic enrichment, offering instead a civil nuclear program that relies on imported fuel from a multinational source. Though Iran has consistently refused to abandon domestic enrichment, there is historical precedent for compromise. In the early 2000s, under the Paris Agreement, Tehran agreed to temporarily suspend enrichment as a voluntary confidence-building measure.

Europe, more pragmatic than the US in its approach, has long avoided taking a hard stance on Iran's legal right to enrich, focusing instead on practical safeguards and transparency. The UK, for instance, interprets the NPT as ambiguous, neither explicitly granting nor denying the right to enrich uranium.

The high-stakes diplomacy has been further complicated by security concerns. One of Araghchi's advisers alleged that Israel attempted to assassinate the Iranian diplomat, prompting European governments to provide security guarantees for his travel.

Russia has offered to mediate talks, but European leaders have firmly declined Moscow's involvement.

Despite its military disadvantage, exacerbated by compromised air defences and infrastructure damage, Iran retains a significant strategic card: the Fordow enrichment plant, likely impervious to conventional Israeli strikes. Unless Washington authorises the use of bunker-busting munitions, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may be forced to recalibrate his objectives.

Netanyahu's hopes for regime change in Tehran also appear to be faltering. Even prominent Iranian reformists have condemned Israel's actions. Nobel Peace Prize laureate Narges Mohammadi appealed directly to Trump: "Do not join this war. Stop it. Be the voice for peace in the Middle East."