Iran and the United States are gearing up for talks in Oman this Saturday in an effort to revive discussions about Iran’s accelerating nuclear activities. Prior to the meeting, a minor yet significant disagreement emerged over the format of the talks. Former President Donald Trump has advocated for direct negotiations, though Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, has stated he plans to communicate indirectly through a mediator with U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff.
Though the nature of the talks might seem trivial, it holds weight as indirect discussions have stalled since Trump unilaterally pulled the U.S. out of the nuclear accord with Tehran in 2018. Simultaneously, Trump has ramped up sanctions against Iran as part of his “maximum pressure” strategy while hinting at potential military action, stressing his belief that a new agreement remains attainable. This campaign included sending a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, emphasizing that a military conflict would be disastrous.
Khamenei, however, has made it clear that Iran would respond to any acts of aggression with their own retaliatory measures. As tensions simmer, it’s important to examine the broader implications of this letter and Iran’s nuclear ambitions, intricately tied with decades of complex U.S.-Iran relations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution.
Trump’s recent attempt to initiate dialogue with Iran came in the form of a letter dated March 5, followed by an admission during a television interview. He mentioned, “I’ve written them a letter saying, ‘I hope you’re going to negotiate because if we have to go in militarily, it’s going to be a terrible thing.'” His administration’s dual approach of pushing for negotiations while intensifying sanctions indicates a strategic duality.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has already voiced his reluctance for direct discussions with the U.S., stressing in a cabinet meeting that while Iran isn’t opposed to dialogue, past breaches of agreements remain a contentious issue and demand the U.S. to restore trust. Supreme Leader Khamenei downplayed Trump’s threats, suggesting that though the likelihood of mischief remains, any aggressive act would be met with fierce retaliation.
Iranian Foreign Ministry representative Esmail Baghaei further condemned what he considered an unprecedented threat from the U.S., accusing it of undermining international peace. Reacting to these provocations, Iran’s capability to launch missiles targeting U.S. interests was highlighted by local media sources, amid heightened military readiness in the region.
Despite insisting on the peaceful nature of its nuclear program, Iran’s advancement to enriching uranium up to near-weapons grade levels raises alarm internationally. The 2015 nuclear agreement permitted enrichment only up to 3.67% purity with limited stockpile allowances, conditions that Iran has far exceeded according to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s reports.
While U.S. intelligence does not confirm Iran’s embarkation on a nuclear weapons program, they note activities positioning Iran closer to potential weapon development, should it choose that path. Veteran Iranian politician Ali Larijani underscored Iran’s technical capacity to develop nuclear arms, though he stressed it isn’t currently on that course, unless driven by external aggression.
The fractious relations stem from a tumultuous history, dating back to when Iran was a U.S. ally under Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, who sheltered American strategic interests. The 1979 Islamic Revolution, however, ousted the shah, severed U.S.-Iranian ties, and led to two nations navigating a landscape of distrust and sporadic diplomacy. These fluctuating dynamics reached a peak with the 2015 nuclear deal, a brief diplomatic lull which crumbled with Trump’s withdrawal, deepening ongoing Middle Eastern tensions.