The long-frozen US-Iran nuclear talks are heating up again, but before discussions can even begin, both sides are already at odds over how they should take place. With tensions rising across the Middle East, this disagreement could shape the future of diplomacy—and peace—in the region.
Trump Pushes for Direct Talks
In a surprise move, former US President Donald Trump claimed on Monday that direct talks with Iran have already started. He also said a “very big meeting” is scheduled for this Saturday, signaling hopes for a new nuclear deal.
“We’re going to get a deal. It’s going to be huge,” Trump told reporters, although he gave no details about the location, time, or specific agenda.
Trump also warned that Iran would face “great danger” if negotiations collapse. His statement seemed designed to apply pressure, both on Iran and on the Biden administration, which has stayed mostly quiet about the recent developments.
Tehran Dismisses Trump’s Claim
Iran, however, quickly pushed back. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi made it clear that there would be no direct contact with US officials. Instead, he confirmed that talks—if they happen—would be indirect, conducted through Oman, a longtime neutral mediator trusted by both countries.
“The format has not changed. There will be no face-to-face meetings. This is a test for America, not us,” Araghchi told Iranian state media.
Other Iranian officials went even further, calling Trump’s statement a “psychological operation” meant to confuse the public and create pressure on Tehran. They emphasized that Iran is not interested in political showmanship, only real, results-driven dialogue.
Also Read: Exclusive: Tehran Considers Indirect US Negotiations Amid Nuclear Tensions
Why These Talks Matter
The US-Iran nuclear talks are critical for global stability. The last successful round of negotiations happened under President Obama in 2015, resulting in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which placed strict limits on Iran’s nuclear activity in exchange for relief from economic sanctions.
But in 2018, Trump withdrew the US from the deal and reimposed sanctions, saying it was “too weak.” In response, Iran began expanding its uranium enrichment program far beyond agreed limits.
Since then, tensions have soared:
-
Iran has increased support for proxy groups like Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis.
-
Israel has threatened military action if Iran moves closer to nuclear weapon capability.
-
The Biden administration has taken a more cautious approach, favoring quiet diplomacy over public announcements.
Oman’s Role in the Middle
As the only Gulf country maintaining good relations with both the US and Iran, Oman is once again stepping into its traditional role as mediator. The country helped during the early stages of the 2015 deal and is now facilitating indirect messages between Washington and Tehran.
Oman’s involvement signals that backchannel diplomacy is still active, even if leaders on both sides are posturing in public.
Also Read: Generative AI Now a Weapon in China-Taiwan Conflict, Says Taipei
A Region on Edge
The broader Middle East is watching closely. Iran’s so-called “Axis of Resistance”—which includes militant groups across Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen—is weakening due to sanctions and internal pressures. A failed round of nuclear talks could trigger new violence, especially if Israel feels the need to act militarily.
Meanwhile, global oil markets are jittery. Any signal of escalation between the US and Iran could spike prices and rattle investor confidence.
What Comes Next?
As the weekend approaches, the question remains: will the US-Iran nuclear talks happen in any form? If they do, can Oman bridge the wide gap between two sides that still don’t agree on how to even meet?
The world is watching, hoping for calm—but bracing for crisis.
Related article: What the 2015 Iran Nuclear Deal Meant—and What’s Changed Since
