Editor’s Note: A version of this article is featured in UJ’s Meanwhile in the Middle East newsletter, providing a weekly overview of the region’s most significant stories. Subscribe here.
UJ
—
Iran is currently contemplating US President Donald Trump’s proposal for discussions regarding a new nuclear agreement. The crux of its decision will depend on a critical element: Whether it perceives that it can emerge from such talks unscathed.
Last week, Trump sent a rare letter to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei proposing negotiations on a new nuclear deal, complete with a two-month deadline for agreement, according to a source familiar with the letter’s contents who spoke to UJ.
The letter reportedly conveyed a “more threatening stance,” but also included “some prospects” for Iran, as stated by the Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Thursday, who noted that Iran’s response will be forthcoming “in the following days.”
Trump’s representative, Steve Witkoff, handed over the letter to the president of the United Arab Emirates last week, and a UAE official subsequently relayed it to Iranian officials.
In a weekend interview with journalist Tucker Carlson, Witkoff shared insights regarding the letter’s intent.
“It essentially conveyed that I am a president who seeks peace, which is my desire. There’s no need for military action. We ought to engage in dialogue to address misconceptions, establish a verification program to alleviate concerns regarding the militarization of your nuclear materials, and work towards that goal. The alternative isn’t favorable,” he explained.
Earlier this month, the US carried out strikes against one of the remaining militias allied with Iran that continues to threaten its interests. The assaults on Yemen’s Houthi rebels served as a warning – a precursor to what Iran itself might experience if it declines to cooperate, US National Security Adviser Mike Waltz conveyed to ABC News.
With Iran’s economy plummeting, its influence in the region dwindling and public ire intensifying, US officials may perceive an opportune moment to compel Tehran into action—tightening the economic noose while signaling the unmistakable threat of military response.
However, experts caution that the situation is far from straightforward: Iran is acutely cautious about appearing weak, and the prospect of being viewed as conceding to Trump is something they are eager to avoid.
“This is a highly dynamic period,” remarked Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Programme at Chatham House in London, during an interview with UJ. “There’s potential for miscalculation, escalating tensions, and a military offensive against Iran.”
In recent weeks, Tehran has consistently turned down direct talks regarding a potential nuclear agreement with the US, asserting that it will not negotiate under duress, fearing that Washington may once again default on its obligations, as it did during Trump’s prior term in office seven years ago.
In crafting its response to Trump’s recent correspondence, Iran will carefully consider “both the threats and the potential opportunities,” according to Araghchi, vowing that it will not negotiate “under coercion or threats or in the wake of heightened sanctions.”
Discussions would need to occur “on an equitable basis,” he emphasized.
For Iran, acquiescing to Trump’s stringent demands for increased sanctions and recurrent military threats is tantamount to surrender, an option they refuse to entertain, experts assert.
“The Iranians are striving to disabuse Trump of the notion that they are so vulnerable that capitulation is a feasible option,” Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute in Washington, shared with UJ.
Iranian authorities have rejected the concept of engaging with Washington, with President Masoud Pezeshkian publicly declaring this month that Iran “will not yield in disgrace before anyone.”
“I have no intention of negotiating with you. Go ahead and do whatever you wish,” Pezeshkian was quoted as saying by the Tehran Times.
This comes in the wake of the Trump administration reinstating a maximum pressure campaign against Iran in February, with the goal of deterring the Islamic Republic from developing nuclear weaponry.
Based on the memorandum, the US would also “execute a campaign aimed at reducing Iran’s oil exports to zero” and restrict Iran from acquiring intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Nonetheless, analysts argue that Trump’s attempts to coerce the Iranians might not yield the anticipated results, as full compliance with Washington is deemed a perilous strategy for Tehran in the current geopolitical landscape.
From Iran’s view, “the risk of capitulation is even more hazardous, and I doubt the Trump administration comprehends that fully,” Parsi remarked.
Following Israel’s military operations in Gaza since October 7, 2023, Iran and Israel have engaged in two cycles of reciprocal attacks, marking the first direct confrontations between the two, with Iran-aligned militias across the region striking at Israeli and US positions in response to the Gaza conflict.
With Israel’s campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon, the ousting of President Bashar al-Assad in Syria, and military operations in Gaza against Hamas, the Islamic Republic’s standing in the region has noticeably diminished.
Its nuclear program has emerged as one of its last cards of influence. In December, United Nations nuclear watchdog chief Rafael Grossi informed Reuters that Iran is “dramatically” escalating its uranium enrichment efforts to levels nearing 60% purity, which is discernibly close to the 90% weapons-grade threshold. Grossi reiterated in January that Iran is “intensifying its uranium enrichment efforts.”
Iran maintains that its nuclear ambitions are peaceful.
Analysts point to a profound mistrust in Washington’s reliability as a fundamental reason for Iran’s reluctance to engage Trump regarding a new agreement.
A controversial exchange between Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky last month further fortified this perception in Iran.
During that incident, Trump and Vice President JD Vance admonished the Ukrainian president in front of international press.
“Zelensky was compelled to say ‘thank you,’ acknowledge that Ukraine has ‘no leverage,’ and ‘respect’ the Americans after requesting security assurances,” the Tehran Times recounted, referring to Pezeshkian’s rationale for declining talks with Trump.
“You should be embarrassed by how you treated Zelensky recently,” Iranian media reported Pezeshkian stating.
This follows the Trump administration’s reinstatement of an aggressive pressure strategy toward Iran in February, which aims to stop the Islamic Republic from developing nuclear arms.
The memorandum indicates that the US would also “launch a campaign aimed at driving Iran’s oil exports to zero” while preventing Iran from obtaining intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Yet analysts believe that Trump’s strategy to exert pressure on Iran may not yield the expected outcomes, as total submission to Washington is perceived as too risky in the current geopolitical context.
Formally named the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA, the agreement aimed to constrain Iran’s nuclear initiatives in exchange for the alleviation of Western sanctions, thereby thwarting Tehran’s path to nuclear armament.
In a post on X this month, Khamenei accused Trump of attempting to “mislead public opinion” by asserting that Washington is prepared for negotiations.
“How could we embark on negotiations with (the) US when we are aware they do not honor their commitments?” Khamenei pressed, adding that “if the aim of entering negotiations is to have the sanctions eliminated, engaging with this US administration will yield no relief from sanctions.”
The landscape for potential new discussions between Tehran and Washington is further complicated by Iran’s internal politics, with anti-US hardliners and reformists favoring dialogue competing for influence.
“Conservatives view this moment as an opportunity to challenge the Pezeshkian administration, bolster their position domestically, and potentially influence nuclear policy,” Vakil mentioned to UJ.
Experts indicate that it is crucial for both the US and Iran to finalize an agreement while there is still a semblance of leverage on the table.
“Iran’s best opportunity for leverage is at this juncture, where negotiations hold potential for concessions and sanctions alleviation. The moment Iran escalates its nuclear efforts towards weaponization, they relinquish that leverage,” Vakil stated.
