伊朗正式回应美国15点停火方案：四大核心条件能否打破中东僵局

当地时间3月25日，伊朗通过外交中间人渠道，正式就美国提出的15点停火方案作出官方回应，这是当前中东紧张局势下一个不可忽视的外交信号。伊朗的回应并非简单接受或拒绝，而是附带了四项明确的前提条件，折射出德黑兰在停火谈判中的底线立场。

伊朗提出四大核心条件

在伊朗的正式回应中，德黑兰围绕停火框架提出了具体诉求，可归纳为以下四点：

• 停止敌方军事行动：要求对方立即终止被伊朗定性为"侵略与恐怖"的军事行为，这是所有后续谈判的首要前提。
• 建立防止战争重演的客观机制：伊朗强调，停火不能只是暂时休战，必须建立可核查的结构性安排，从根本上消除冲突复发的条件。
• 明确赔偿战争损失：德黑兰要求对方对战争中造成的损失作出具体赔偿承诺，并付诸实施，这一条件在历史上的停火谈判中往往是最难达成共识的部分。
• 地区抵抗组织全面停止行动：伊朗同时要求所有战线上与其存在联动关系的武装力量同步结束军事行动，这意味着停火协议的覆盖范围将不局限于伊朗本身，而是牵涉整个地区格局。

谈判背后的深层博弈

从外交逻辑来看，伊朗选择通过中间人渠道而非直接对话作出回应，本身就是一种有意为之的姿态——既表明愿意参与谈判进程，又保留了与美方保持距离的战略空间。

停火谈判从来不只是军事问题，更是地缘政治利益的重新分配。伊朗提出赔偿与机制保障，实际上是在要求对方承认这场冲突中己方所受的损害具有合法性。

值得注意的是，伊朗将地区抵抗组织的行动纳入停火条件，这一表态具有双重意义：一方面显示出德黑兰对相关组织的影响力；另一方面也意味着，若谈判破裂，这些力量的动向将成为局势升级的重要变量。中东停火谈判能否取得实质进展，关键在于美伊双方能否在上述条件上找到可接受的交集。

目前，美方尚未公开表态如何回应伊朗的反馈。这场围绕15点方案的外交往来，正在考验两国及相关各方的政治意愿与谈判弹性。中东局势的走向，仍充满变数。

Iran Formally Responds to US 15-Point Ceasefire Proposal: Four Core Conditions That Could Shape Middle East Peace

On March 25 local time, Iran formally delivered its official response to the US-proposed 15-point ceasefire framework through diplomatic intermediaries — a significant signal amid the ongoing tensions in the Middle East. Rather than a straightforward acceptance or rejection, Tehran's reply came with four explicit preconditions, revealing the red lines Iran intends to hold in any ceasefire negotiation.

Iran's Four Core Conditions

In its formal response, Tehran outlined a set of specific demands tied to the ceasefire framework. These can be summarized as follows:

• Halt all hostile military operations: Iran insists that what it characterizes as acts of "aggression and terrorism" must cease immediately — a non-negotiable prerequisite before any further talks can proceed.
• Establish structural safeguards against renewed conflict: Tehran emphasizes that a ceasefire must be more than a temporary pause. Verifiable, institutionalized arrangements must be put in place to address the root conditions that could trigger future hostilities.
• Concrete commitment to war reparations: Iran is demanding that the opposing side formally commit to — and follow through on — compensation for damages caused during the conflict. Historically, this type of demand has proven to be among the most contentious in ceasefire negotiations.
• Full cessation of operations by regional resistance groups: Tehran requires that all armed factions aligned with Iran across various fronts simultaneously stand down. This signals that any ceasefire deal would need to encompass the broader regional landscape, not just Iran's direct military involvement.

The Deeper Strategic Calculus

From a diplomatic standpoint, Iran's decision to respond through intermediaries rather than via direct dialogue is itself a calculated move — signaling a willingness to engage in the negotiation process while preserving strategic distance from Washington.

Ceasefire talks are never purely a military matter. By demanding reparations and institutional guarantees, Iran is essentially seeking acknowledgment that the harm it suffered in this conflict carries legal and political legitimacy.

It is also worth noting that Iran's inclusion of regional resistance group activity as part of its ceasefire conditions carries a dual message: it underscores Tehran's influence over those factions, while also serving as a reminder that, should talks collapse, these forces could become a key driver of further escalation. The real question is whether the US and Iran can find enough common ground on these four conditions to move negotiations forward.

As of now, Washington has yet to issue a public response to Iran's counter-position. This diplomatic exchange over the 15-point proposal is testing the political will and negotiating flexibility of all parties involved. The trajectory of the Middle East ceasefire talks remains deeply uncertain.