Iranian Officials Refuse Talks with Witkoff and Kushner, Accusing Them of ‘Stabbing Them in the Back’ – They Want JD Vance Instead
Amid the ongoing US-Iran conflict that erupted with joint US-Israeli military strikes in late February 2026, Iranian officials have signaled a firm refusal to engage in further negotiations with two key figures from the Trump administration: special Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and senior adviser Jared Kushner.
According to multiple reports citing Gulf and regional sources, Tehran has accused Witkoff and Kushner of bad-faith diplomacy. Iranian representatives claim the pair participated in nuclear and de-escalation talks in February — including a reportedly tense session in Geneva — only for US and Israeli forces to launch Operation Roaring Lion (known in the US as Operation Epic Fury) shortly afterward. This sequence of events has led Iran to label the earlier discussions as a deception, with officials stating that Witkoff and Kushner “stabbed them in the back” by using talks as cover while strikes were being prepared.
The deep mistrust stems from the timing: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and other figures engaged with US envoys, yet military action targeted sites in Tehran and elsewhere soon after. Iranian sources, including those close to the Revolutionary Guards, now view the duo as prioritizing Israeli interests over genuine brokerage, further eroding any remaining confidence.
Preference for JD Vance as Interlocutor
Instead of continuing with Witkoff or Kushner, Iranian channels have indicated openness to negotiations led by Vice President JD Vance. Gulf sources told outlets including The Telegraph that “Vance is the preferred option” and “Iran’s favorite.” Reasons include:
- Vance was largely absent from the pre-strike February discussions, leaving him untainted by the “backstabbing” allegations.
- He is perceived by some Iranian and regional actors as more skeptical of escalation and potentially more inclined toward a diplomatic off-ramp compared to other administration hardliners.
- Reports suggest Witkoff himself has floated Vance taking a leading role due to his senior position and the Iranians’ stated views.
This preference has been conveyed through back-channel intermediaries, including from Turkey, Egypt, and Pakistan. Mediators are reportedly exploring a possible meeting in Islamabad, Pakistan, potentially as soon as this week, to discuss a ceasefire framework or broader de-escalation. Some accounts mention efforts for a one-month pause in hostilities.
Contrasting US and Iranian Positions
President Donald Trump has presented a different picture. Speaking at the White House on Tuesday, he stated that the US is “in negotiations right now” with Iran, involving Witkoff, Kushner, Secretary of State Marco Rubio, and Vance. Trump credited “very good” and “very strong” talks led by Witkoff and Kushner with influencing decisions, such as holding back from striking Iran’s critical energy infrastructure. He described points of agreement on ending hostilities and even claimed Iran had made concessions, including on its nuclear program.
Iran, however, has repeatedly denied active high-level talks or downplayed them. Officials like Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf have pushed back against US claims, insisting any outreach must first address the consequences of American and Israeli actions. Iranian sources emphasize “zero trust” in Witkoff and Kushner, with one diplomatic contact stating that “with Witkoff and Kushner, nothing will come out of it. We have seen that in the past.” They argue that only a change in negotiators — specifically elevating Vance — could yield results.
Broader Context and Volatility
The diplomatic maneuvering occurs against a backdrop of continued military posturing. The Pentagon is reportedly preparing deployments, including elements of the 82nd Airborne Division to the Middle East. Iran has hardened its stance post-strikes, with increased influence from hardline elements within the regime. Both sides continue to balance pressure with potential off-ramps, using third-party mediators.
This latest development reflects classic realpolitik in a high-stakes conflict: deep mistrust from the timing and conduct of prior talks has prompted Iran to seek a “cleaner” US counterpart in Vance. Whether this preference translates into concrete progress remains uncertain, as the situation stays highly fluid. Trump administration officials maintain that all named figures, including Vance, will remain involved under the president’s direction.
As efforts for de-escalation continue through regional channels, the coming days could prove decisive in determining if diplomacy can gain traction or if military dynamics will dominate.
About The Author
