Alwaght- Today, the first round of indirect talks between Iran and the US was held in the Omani capital Muscat in order for the two sides to see if they can patch things up.
In this high-level round of talks, Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff led the American delegation and Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araghchi led the Iranian delegation.
The marathon began as the debate over the format of the talks continues to dominate. Iranian officials said they will talk with their American counterparts in Oman indirectly. American and Iranian negotiators met in separate rooms, and Omani diplomats traded messages between the two sides.
There is no doubt that the start of US-Iranian talks is a positive development for de-escalation of tensions between the two countries. Although the media focus on whether these talks are direct or indirect, what determines their chances of success in the next rounds is not their form, but their scope.
Trump has repeatedly stated that he is willing to make a deal with Iran, but that the country must not acquire nuclear weapons. Although this position is Trump’s personal desire, some people in his inner circle are making statements outside this framework that could derail the negotiations. For example, Witkoff had said before the start of the Oman talks that the American position begins with dismantling Iran’s program, and that is our position today. However, that does not mean that we will not find other ways to compromise between the two countries on the sidelines.
The US envoy said that if Iran does not eliminate its nuclear program, he will raise the issue with Trump to determine what steps he will take next and that this will put the White House face to face with a hard choice of how far it can tolerate Iran's nuclear activities.
Meanwhile, US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz went further and claimed that Washington's position is that Iran must dismantle its civilian nuclear program, saying that the US wants "the complete dismantling of the nuclear program, otherwise there will be consequences."
Some US officials, in accordance with the Israelis, claim that Iran must also completely dismantle its nuclear program, as in the Libyan agreement with the US in 2003, but Tehran strongly opposes these excesses and considers the peaceful use of the nuclear program to be its inalienable right.
However, negotiations over their structure are more difficult than their content and what will be up for negotiation in next stages, because Iran has repeatedly stated that it will only accept negotiations within the framework of verifying its nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.
If Trump’s real goal is to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons, the Supreme Leader of Iran Sayyed Ali Khamenei declared this issue forbidden years ago by issuing a fatwa, and therefore any excuses and pretexts from Washington are unacceptable.
Therefore, if the negotiations remain focused on verifiable limits on Iran’s peaceful and civilian nuclear program, the horizon for success will be clear. However, if the US-eyed agreement includes dismantling Iran’s legal civilian nuclear program and the American side seeks to raise irrelevant issues, the negotiations will fail, and now everything depends on the way the Americans view it as to how far they will back down from their positions.
The two sides described the first round as "positive", but it should not be forgotten that they are in their earlier stage and much lies ahead.
Why are the talks indirect?
Despite the fact that Trump administration claims that direct talks can rapidly produce an agreement, Tehran officials believe engagement in direct talks depends on the extent of progress in the first round.
"Indirect talks are currently our preferred option and we have no plans to change them to direct talks," Araghchi said.
Iran’s reluctance to engage in direct negotiations stems from two reasons. The first is the Iranian government’s refusal to yield to external pressure and negotiate under threat, as President Masoud Pezzekian has pointed out.
The second is the experience of Trump's breach of the 2015 deal, which has made Iran completely distrustful of US goodwill, and the White House must pay the price for its mistake and cannot demand direct negotiations again without proving its goodwill. This was clear in recent words of the Leader, who, recalling the Trump administration’s past breach of promise, said: “This same US president tore up the previously signed nuclear deal, so how can we negotiate with America when we know that America is not fulfilling its commitments?”
Iranian officials have repeatedly said that they will not yield to rhetoric of threats and force and despite engaging in diplomacy, they are prepared for any scenario, and warnings by senior Iranian officials about dire consequences of military action against Tehran bear witness to this fact.
Therefore, the disagreement on the fashion of negotiations not only reflects the political tensions between the two countries, but also indicates a strategic gap in how to deal with existing diplomatic crises. Iran, which has the bitter experience of the US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), now does not consider direct negotiations to be trustworthy. Tehran has repeatedly stressed that in the current regional atmosphere and given Washington's evident record of treachery, the only acceptable path is indirect talks through intermediaries such as Oman. While Trump is trying to reach a noisy and propagandistic agreement with Iran, Tehran has chosen a cautious and step-by-step strategy because experience shows that the US does not adhere to its commitments and, for this reason, indirect negotiations can give Tehran more assurance of securing its interests.
Generally, as long as the Americans look at the negotiating table with a policy of threatening and intimidation and will not walk back from some of their stances for a possible deal, there will be no hope of success of the talks. If Trump wants to take the credit for signing a deal with Iran, for which has waited years, this may be his last shot. But if he presses to far with his excesses, the whole deal will go up in smoke.
