The stakes couldn’t be higher for the upcoming nuclear discussions between the United States and Iran scheduled for this weekend.
Israel, perceiving Iran as a dire threat, along with the U.S., regards Iran as a rogue state determined to seek weapons of mass destruction, willing to take aggressive actions against its adversaries.
On the other hand, Iranian leaders face a critical decision: abandon their nuclear ambitions, which could increase their long-term vulnerability, or persist in nuclear development, significantly heightening the risk of a military strike from Israel and the U.S.
Although Iran has consistently claimed it does not intend to develop nuclear arms, senior officials have warned that any military aggression against them would alter this stance and potentially lead to the pursuit of a nuclear bomb.
President Donald Trump announced the forthcoming negotiations unexpectedly on Monday while alongside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who is Iran’s staunch adversary.
While Trump described the talks as “direct” engagements with Tehran, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi quickly clarified that the discussions would initially be indirect.
The White House has yet to comment on this discrepancy.
These indirect discussions are anticipated to serve as a “starting point and a communication bridge” to enhance mutual understanding between the two sides, according to Aniseh Bassiri Tabrizi, an associate fellow at Chatham House’s Middle East and North Africa program.
“These negotiations are likely to be more assertive than any subsequent talks,” she noted. “It’s important to recognize that there hasn’t been direct engagement between the U.S. and Iran for some time.”
Tough Talk
As the talks approach this weekend, the American delegation is adopting a firm posture, having imposed new sanctions on Wednesday.
Hovering over the discussions in the Gulf nation of Oman is Trump’s warning that should the negotiations falter, “Iran is going to be in great danger.” He has suggested military action against Iran if an agreement regarding its nuclear program is not reached.
The effort to curtail Iran’s nuclear activities is a continuation of Trump’s previous term, during which he withdrew the U.S. from the landmark 2015 Iranian nuclear agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Under this accord, Iran consented to dismantle substantial parts of its nuclear program and allow inspections in return for sanctions relief.
Trump pulled the U.S. out of the JCPOA, branding it a “terrible one-sided deal” that failed to tackle Tehran’s ballistic missile program or its proxy networks across the region. This move infuriated the Iranian government, which had complied with the conditions of the agreement signed by the Obama administration and five other global powers.
The upcoming talks also follow repeated alerts from Rafael Grossi, the head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency, about Iran’s “dramatic” acceleration in uranium enrichment to levels up to 60%, nearing the approximately 90% threshold required for weapons-grade material.
In an op-ed for The Washington Post, Araghchi asserted that there was no proof Tehran had breached its pledge not to pursue nuclear weapons, expressing Iran’s readiness to clarify its peaceful intentions and take necessary steps to alleviate any concerns.
Morteza Nikoubazl / NurPhoto via Reuters
Simultaneously, the ongoing conflict in the Gaza Strip, which has engulfed the Middle East for the past 18 months, has seen two of Iran’s key allies, Hamas and Hezbollah, significantly weakened by Israeli military action, prompting Washington to increasingly target the Houthis in Yemen.
‘Very High Price’
Richard Dearlove, the former head of the British intelligence agency MI6, told NBC News in an interview on Thursday that he believes the Trump administration will “demand a very high price” from Iran—specifically, that it relinquish its entire nuclear program, including both energy and weapons-related pursuits.
“For Trump and Israel, the bottom line is that Iran must not possess nuclear capability,” he asserted.
Seyed Hossein Mousavian, a specialist in Middle East security and nuclear policy at Princeton University, who previously served as Iran’s spokesman in nuclear negotiations with the West, expressed skepticism that failure of this weekend’s discussions would lead to an immediate “alternative of war.”
Trump has offered little comfort regarding diplomatic outcomes, cautioning on Monday: “If the talks do not succeed, it’s going to be a very bad day for Iran.”
“Iran is indeed in a different position compared to 2016 or even 2023,” Tabrizi noted, highlighting the significant events that have transpired over the past year and a half, especially the degradation of Tehran’s allied groups.
Mousavian concurred, asserting that both parties would utilize the indirect discussions to “evaluate each other’s intentions and positions.”
However, time is running short. With Iran’s proxies suffering considerable setbacks and its air defenses compromised in recent retaliatory encounters with Israel, Israeli officials and hawkish Republicans in Washington believe that this is the opportune moment for military action against Iran’s nuclear facilities.
