BlockBeats News, June 12th. The U.S. and Iran once again showed differences in the progress of negotiations around a potential agreement. U.S. President Trump has publicly stated multiple times that the agreement is "close to signing," even suggesting it could be reached as soon as this weekend. However, Iran responded through the Fars News Agency, stating that the relevant text has not yet received final approval from the top leadership.

According to multiple sources familiar with the matter, the current communication mechanism between the U.S. and Iran has become highly indirect. Due to security concerns at the highest levels of the Iranian leadership and communication restrictions, negotiation information needs to be relayed through third-party countries and then delivered to the underground decision-making level in Tehran by human messengers, with the overall transmission process taking up to several days.

Sources of information revealed that U.S. proposals are usually first conveyed through intermediary parties such as Pakistan, then transmitted to the core decision-making level in Iran in a nondigital manner, making a round-trip communication take 3 to 5 days. Some diplomats have pointed out that even if conditions progress smoothly, there are significant delays in confirming the agreement text.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo had previously acknowledged the evident time lag in communication, stating that "feedback delivery takes several days" and considering it a major obstacle to the advancement of negotiations.

In terms of the negotiation content, the two sides are currently mainly focused on a ceasefire and basic arrangements, while complex issues such as sanctions relief, the nuclear problem, and asset arrangements are left for subsequent handling. Analysts have pointed out that executing this phased structure without face-to-face negotiations presents a higher level of difficulty.

Former U.S. negotiator in the Middle East, Aaron David Miller, stated that complex agreements usually require weeks of intensive face-to-face negotiations, and the current format is struggling to support the detailed technical terms.

Meanwhile, Iran has significantly reduced the use of digital communication for security reasons to avoid tracking risks, which is believed to further exacerbate the decline in communication efficiency. Some analysts believe that this low-frequency communication method may be used by Tehran to prolong the pace of negotiations, enhancing its strategic space.

Nevertheless, limited direct communication channels between the U.S. and Iran are still maintained, including indirect information exchange between White House envoys and the Iranian Foreign Minister. However, overall, the current progress of the negotiations still heavily relies on third-party coordination and non-real-time information transmission mechanisms.

Multiple diplomatic sources have pointed out that under the current structure, the pace of agreement reached still depends on the effectiveness of intermediary mediation and the political judgment of both parties, rather than the traditional direct negotiation progress.