This collection of images taken on April 09, 2025, displays U.S. Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff following a meeting with Russian officials at Diriyah Palace in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on February 18, 2025 (L), alongside Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi talking to AFP during an interview at the Iranian consulate in Jeddah on March 7, 2025.
Evelyn Hockstein | Amer Hilabi | AFP | Getty Images
DUBAI, United Arab Emirates — Negotiations between the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump and the Iranian government regarding a potential renewal of the nuclear agreement commenced positively over the weekend, as indicated by representatives from both nations, despite ongoing challenges and uncertainty regarding each side’s specific demands.
Encouragingly, there was an increase in optimism surrounding a deal and overall dialogue between these longstanding adversaries. Delegates from both the U.S. and Iran have decided to reconvene for additional discussions next week in Rome, while Iran’s Foreign Affairs Ministry characterized Saturday’s negotiations as occurring in a “constructive atmosphere and founded on mutual respect.”
This situation emphasizes the stark contrast between the Biden administration’s efforts to reinstate the 2015 nuclear accord and the position currently held by the Trump administration: one characterized by significantly altered advantages for Washington and a notably weakened and more vulnerable Iran.
“The Iranians seem to be somewhat more desperate than they were in 2022, given their exceedingly fragile economy,” stated Gregory Brew, a senior analyst focused on Iran and energy at the Eurasia Group consultancy, in an interview with CNBC.
“Iran’s geopolitical standing has weakened considerably. They are anxious about how much more pressure they can endure — the levels of internal discontent are likely to escalate. Therefore, they may be keen on securing a deal sooner rather than later, and Trump is either offering them, or has the potential to offer them, such an opportunity.”
Brew also noted Biden’s limitations due to public opinion, risking backlash for appearing overly lenient on Iran. Trump, on the other hand, does not face those same constraints as he is already perceived as an Iran hawk and quickly reinstated stringent “maximum pressure” sanctions on the nation upon taking office.
Iran’s economy has significantly deteriorated since Trump withdrew the U.S. from the multilateral agreement in 2018, known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). This accord was established in 2015 with the backing of Russia, China, the EU, and the U.K. under the Obama administration to limit and closely monitor Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for relief from sanctions.
Prior to this, Iran was already grappling with several years of protests, a drastically devalued currency, and a cost-of-living crisis. The Islamic Republic faced further setbacks last year when it lost its primary ally in the Middle East due to the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria. Concurrently, Israel, Iran’s main adversary, eliminated a significant portion of Hezbollah’s senior leadership, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon.
Although Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had historically been staunchly against negotiations with the U.S., senior officials within the Iranian government reportedly initiated a coordinated effort to persuade him otherwise, presenting the negotiations as vital for the regime’s continued existence.
What kind of a ‘nuclear program’ are we discussing?
Trump has made it very clear that he will not accept a nuclear-armed Iran. Recent developments have escalated the stakes: since Trump’s withdrawal from the JCPOA, Iran has been enriching and stockpiling uranium at unprecedented levels, leading the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.N. nuclear watchdog, to issue multiple warnings.
“Iran continues to be the only non-nuclear weapon state enriching uranium to these levels, raising significant concerns about the potential for weapons development,” stated a U.N. news release dated March 3.
While Tehran maintains that its program is solely for civilian energy purposes, Iran’s uranium enrichment has reportedly reached 60% purity, as per the IAEA — a substantial increase beyond the enrichment threshold established in the 2015 nuclear deal, and a short technical step away from the weapons-grade purity level of 90%.
Trump has consistently cautioned about the potential for a U.S. military response if Iran does not alter its course to align with Washington’s expectations.
“I would prefer a deal with Iran regarding non-nuclear issues. I would rather see that than to bomb them,” Trump expressed in an early February interview with the New York Post.
This mounting pressure has evidently influenced Tehran’s openness to engagement, asserts Ryan Bohl, a senior analyst for the Middle East and North Africa at the RANE Network.
“I believe the Iranians are eager to formulate a viable framework that would facilitate prolonged negotiations, potentially averting military actions that President Trump has warned could transpire in a matter of months,” Bohl noted.
“Furthermore,” he remarked, “the Iranian economy would benefit from any hint of relief, which, in turn, could bolster public support for the Islamic Republic.”
Nevertheless, specific details regarding a prospective agreement remain undefined, and upcoming discussions will shed light on the extent of the disparities between each nation’s position.
A primary sticking point is Iran’s refusal to dismantle its nuclear program — a non-negotiable stance for Tehran, as their leaders have articulated. However, the exact nature of the program may be something the Trump administration is willing to approach with some flexibility, as long as Iran does not have the capability to develop a nuclear weapon.
Subsequent discussions will need to outline Trump’s specific conditions, which have thus far been kept confidential.
“Ultimately, I believe the crux of these negotiations has always revolved around what the U.S. demands from Iran,” remarked Nader Itayim, Mideast Gulf Editor at Argus Media, during an interview with CNBC’s “Access Middle East” on Monday.
“Is the U.S. aiming for the complete dismantling of the Iranian nuclear program, or is it simply about ensuring verification to prevent any potential weaponization of this program?”
“I think Donald Trump has been very explicit over the last two to three weeks in particular: there will be no weaponization. The notion of weaponization remains a red line,” Itayim asserted. “The Iranians can work with that — they have always maintained that they are not in pursuit of nuclear weapons. Thus, this can serve as a solid starting point.”
Deep-seated mistrust persists between the two parties, and advocates for a hardline stance on Iran — particularly U.S. ally Israel — express dissatisfaction regarding the ongoing negotiations and oppose any potential leniency from the Trump administration.
On Wednesday, just days prior to the U.S.-Iran discussions in Oman, Trump stated that Israel would take the lead in any prospective military action against Iran, should its government fail to cease its nuclear weapons program.
