US and Iran talk again. Is war really off the table?

The USA and Iran have reopened high-level diplomatic talks over Tehran’s nuclear program, holding their first oblique negotiations in years. The assembly came about in Muscat, Oman, with Iranian Overseas Minister Abbas Araghchi main Tehran’s delegation and US Particular Presidential Envoy Steve Witcoff representing Washington. This marks the best stage of engagement between the 2 nations since 2018.

The talks had been performed through shuttle diplomacy: the 2 delegations had been housed in separate rooms, with Oman’s Overseas Minister Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi appearing because the go-between.

Following the session, Araghchi described the assembly as a constructive first step. “For a primary spherical, the discussions had been optimistic,” he mentioned in an interview with Iranian state tv. “They had been held in a relaxed, respectful atmosphere, free from inflammatory language. Each side appeared dedicated to transferring the method ahead towards a workable settlement.”

The White Home echoed this sentiment in a quick assertion, describing the talks as “very optimistic and constructive.” It emphasised that Witcoff had been instructed to pursue diplomacy wherever potential and work towards resolving disagreements by means of dialogue.

President Donald Trump, when requested concerning the talks by reporters, provided a guarded endorsement. “I feel they’re going properly,” he mentioned. “However nothing issues till it’s accomplished. I don’t like speaking about it an excessive amount of. Nonetheless, it’s transferring alongside.”

Diplomacy with out belief

Regardless of his aggressive rhetoric and an expanded US army presence within the area, Trump has continued to specific an curiosity in diplomacy. He introduced the resumption of talks whereas seated beside Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – an particularly vital second, as Netanyahu doubtless anticipated a stronger present of help for potential army motion towards Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.

As a substitute, Trump emphasised the necessity for negotiation, signaling both a strategic pause or probably a broader plan that prioritizes political leverage over speedy confrontation.

In Tehran, officers have responded with skepticism. Though Iran has by no means totally dominated out dialogue with the West and had hoped for a diplomatic thaw, state-affiliated media outlet NourNews framed Trump’s feedback as a “psychological operation” aimed toward shaping a story that advantages Washington each at dwelling and overseas.

Iran, for its half, is approaching talks with a practical however agency set of calls for. Officers have outlined clear situations that should be met earlier than any deal could be reached. Chief amongst them: lifting key sanctions – significantly these affecting the vitality and banking sectors – unfreezing Iranian property held in international banks (notably in Europe and East Asia), and securing agency ensures towards future US or Israeli army strikes.

These calls for mirror deep-rooted mistrust. From Tehran’s perspective, the US withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal – regardless of Iran’s compliance and its acknowledgement by US allies just like the UK, Germany, and France – stands as proof that Washington’s commitments can’t be trusted.

Whether or not the US is ready to fulfill Iran’s phrases stays unsure. Trump has lengthy portrayed himself as a pacesetter who can strike offers and keep away from drawn-out wars, a story that performs properly along with his political base. However his observe file with Iran suggests in any other case. The US has repeatedly walked away from agreements with out significant penalties, reinforcing the Iranian view that verbal and even signed commitments from Washington usually are not strategically dependable.

This hole between rhetorical diplomacy and concrete ensures is now entrance and middle. Tehran insists on binding, measurable phrases. However from Washington’s perspective, providing sweeping concessions could possibly be seen as a lack of leverage. That places each side at an deadlock: Iran is asking for assurances the US is reluctant to present, whereas the US expects compromise from a rustic whose regional affect has diminished.

Iran’s negotiating place has certainly weakened. A decade in the past, it might depend on a powerful community of regional proxies – Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas, and varied Shiite teams in Iraq and Syria. As we speak, a lot of these property have been degraded or sidelined. Whereas Iran nonetheless holds sway in Iraq, even Baghdad is now pursuing a extra balanced international coverage that features nearer ties with the US, Gulf nations, and Türkiye, additional limiting Tehran’s regional attain.

In brief, Iran is making maximalist calls for from a place of diminished leverage. That makes it unlikely Washington will grant vital concessions within the close to time period. Each side are caught: Iran is pushing for ensures the US doesn’t need – or isn’t in a position – to present, whereas the US expects flexibility from an more and more remoted adversary.

Which raises the looming query: What if talks collapse?

Struggle situations

We can’t utterly dismiss the idea that Trump could also be utilizing diplomacy to set the stage for a army confrontation. His administration’s previous actions – exiting the 2015 deal, ordering the assassination of Common Qassem Soleimani, increasing sanctions, and reinforcing US army positions within the area – have constantly undercut probabilities for dialogue. So whereas these talks could also be real, they may additionally serve to justify future army motion if diplomacy fails.

Analysts imagine Washington is contemplating two most important choices for putting Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, particularly in Natanz and Fordow. One situation entails a joint operation with the Israeli Air Drive. The opposite envisions a solo Israeli strike. In both case, precision airstrikes involving superior munitions are anticipated.

Iran’s air protection techniques are unlikely to repel such an assault – particularly if the US deploys B-2 stealth bombers or GBU-57 bunker-busting bombs. A full-scale strike might severely harm each above-ground and underground services.

Traditionally, Iran has relied on uneven retaliation, focusing on adversaries by means of non-conventional means. However its means to reply this manner has eroded. Hezbollah has sustained main losses amid stepped-up Israeli army campaigns, and Syria – as soon as a linchpin of Iran’s technique underneath Bashar al-Assad – has successfully fallen underneath the affect of Tehran’s rivals.

Given this shift, Iran would doubtless rely primarily by itself assets in any counter-strike. Whereas extra remoted than earlier than, it nonetheless wields a various array of instruments: ballistic missiles, assault drones, cyber capabilities, and regional proxy operations.

One possible type of retaliation can be missile and drone strikes on Israel. That’s not simply hypothesis – Tehran executed restricted however unprecedented assaults in 2024. In a single case, it launched roughly 200 missiles, a few of which bypassed Israeli air defenses and hit Nevatim Air Base. These actions signaled Iran’s intent and capability to reply forcefully. Whereas Israel maintains one of many world’s most superior air protection techniques, such assaults might nonetheless carry severe political and strategic penalties.

American bases within the area are additionally potential targets. The US maintains a sprawling army footprint throughout the Center East – together with in Iraq, Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Bahrain, and Saudi Arabia – with roughly 40,000 troops stationed there as of late 2024. These services have already been hit by Iran-backed teams. In January, a drone launched from Iraqi territory breached US defenses in Jordan, killing three service members. Iran additionally retaliated for Soleimani’s killing in 2020 by launching direct missile strikes on two American bases in Iraq, leading to dozens of concussions amongst personnel.

In comparison with Israeli targets, US bases are usually nearer to Iran and its regional proxies – and fewer well-protected – making them engaging targets for each typical and uneven retaliation. Nonetheless, putting US forces carries far larger dangers, probably triggering an amazing American response.

Consistent with its uneven playbook, Iran may additionally search to use strain by means of regional companions. Gulf nations reminiscent of Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, and Kuwait – key logistical and army allies of the US – might discover themselves within the crosshairs. Iran has already warned these governments that permitting American forces to make use of their territory or airspace can be seen as an act of conflict. Nonetheless, attacking these nations instantly would carry excessive stakes, significantly in gentle of Iran’s latest diplomatic thaw with Riyadh in early 2023. Ought to Iran pursue this path, it’s extra more likely to focus its retaliation on US property fairly than Arab infrastructure.

One other factor in Tehran’s deterrence playbook is the menace to shut the Strait of Hormuz – a vital choke level for international oil and LNG shipments. Round 20% of the world’s oil exports and greater than 30% of all liquefied pure fuel passes by means of this slender hall. Any blockade might trigger vitality costs to spike and throw international markets into turmoil.

Nonetheless, such a transfer might backfire. Iran’s economic system relies upon closely on oil and fuel exports, and disrupting that circulate would lower into its personal revenues. A closure would additionally threat damaging relations with key financial companions – particularly China, the most important purchaser of Iranian oil. In contrast to the US, China’s vitality safety is instantly tied to Hormuz’s stability, and any disruption could possibly be seen as a menace to Beijing’s nationwide pursuits.

***

At this level, all eyes are on whether or not the talks can acquire even modest traction. A minimal diplomatic breakthrough might delay – and even forestall – the sorts of escalatory measures now being mentioned.

In a area the place the stakes are as excessive because the mistrust is deep, even small steps towards diplomacy could be a best-case situation – for now.