A second source confirmed that the US demanded that the Iranian delegation leave, but said Araghchi was scheduled to travel back to Tehran on Monday night anyway, reports Axios

Requests of this kind for a visiting delegation to depart have historically marked either a breakdown in an ongoing negotiating track or a pretext for escalation, and the second-source confirmation matters less for its content than for the detail that the foreign minister was already scheduled to leave, which shifts the read from expulsion toward face-saving sequencing. Episodes where one side controls the optics of a departure have tended to produce a round of competing official statements before any substantive change in posture, and the pattern is for the first wire version to be walked back or reframed by one capital or the other. The actors here have prior form for negotiating through intermediaries and public signalling simultaneously, so rhetorical temperature and diplomatic mechanics have often diverged. The operative distinction is whether the departure interrupts an active channel or merely punctuates a lull; the former has historically carried the larger tail risk for crude through the Strait of Hormuz risk premium, freight and insurance rates, while the latter has tended to fade within sessions. Worth watching is whether Tehran or Washington characterises the visit as cancelled or concluded, and whether back-channel contacts resume. As reported diplomatic friction rather than a kinetic event, the established pattern is a contained oil bid absent evidence of actual escalation.