Iran, wrongfooted by Donald Trump’s revelation that “direct talks” between the US and Iran on its nuclear programme are set to start in Oman on Saturday, insisted the talks would actually be in an indirect format, but added that the intentions of the negotiators were more important than the format.
Trump on Monday threw Tehran off guard by revealing the plan for the weekend talks and saying that if the talks failed Iran would be in “great danger”. There has been an unprecedented US military buildup across the Middle East in recent weeks, and Trump’s decision to make the talks public looks designed to press Iran to negotiate with urgency.
The US delegation to the talks will be led by Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy to the Middle East, who has also been involved in talks with Russia over the Ukraine war; and the Iranian side by its foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi. Witkoff’s efforts to broker peace between Israel and Hamas and between Russia and Ukraine have so far failed.
Iran had in public been stalling about talks, saying simply that it was prepared for indirect talks with the US, but had not yet received a formal response from the US as to whether talks were going ahead. In a post on X issued some hours after Trump used an Oval Office press conference to reveal the agreement to stage weekend talks, Araghchi described the talks as an opportunity and a test. He insisted the ball was in the US’s court.
Speaking during a visit to Algiers, Araghchi elaborated that Iran wanted indirect talks. He said: “The form of negotiations is not important, whether they are direct or indirect. In my opinion, what is important is whether the negotiations are effective or ineffective, whether the parties are serious or not in the negotiations, the intentions of the parties in the negotiations, and the will to reach a solution. These are the criteria for action in any dialogue.”
He added Iran had not agreed on any formula that would allow indirect talks to convert into direct talks, but the US expects the talks to evolve into a direct negotiation. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, has vetoed direct talks in protest at US sanctions and in deference to hardliners that believe talks with the US over Tehran’s nuclear programme are a political trap.
The former Iranian president Hassan Rouhani welcomed the news of the talks and said if the 2015 nuclear deal was conducted indirectly it would have taken 20 years and not two to conclude.
Trump pulled out of that deal – known as the joint comprehensive plan of action – during his first term. That deal had offered Iran sanctions relief in exchange for limitations on its uranium enrichment activities.
Iran is waiting to see if Trump will be content if the talks focus on a new system of surveillance of its civil nuclear programme, not dissimilar to the treaty from which Trump withdrew the US in 2018; or instead the US will seek to dismantle Iran’s entire nuclear programme, a step that increasingly has been referred to as the Libya option. In December 2003, Libya’s longtime leader Muammar Gaddafi renounced the country’s weapons of mass destruction programme and allowed international inspectors to verify that Tripoli would follow through on its commitment.
Speaking alongside Trump in the Oval House on Monday, Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, advocated the Libya option, but Iran insists it will not abandon its civil nuclear programme. Israel ultimately does not trust Iran and expects the talks to fail. It then favours a US-Israeli military strike to destroy Iran’s nuclear sites.
But Witkoff, in an interview with Tucker Carlson three weeks ago, suggested Trump’s demands of Iran may be relatively modest. He said Trump, in his letter seeking talks with Iran, had said: “We should clear up the misconceptions. We should create a verification programme so that nobody worries about weaponisation of your nuclear material. And I’d like to get us to that place because the alternative is not a very good alternative. That’s a rough encapsulation of what was said.”
But Trump is under pressure to reach an agreement that is more watertight than the agreement reached by Barack Obama in 2015.
Previewing Iran’s position in the talks, Araghchi said: “Iran’s nuclear programme is completely peaceful and legitimate. UN security council resolution 2231 has just confirmed its legitimacy. There is no doubt about it internationally. If anyone has any questions or ambiguities, we are ready to clarify. We are confident that our nuclear programme is peaceful and we have no problem building more confidence into this unless it creates a limitation for us or is an obstacle to Iran’s goals.”
Iran has always insisted a fatwa exists against building nuclear weapons, but senior Iranian politicians, faced by a series of military reversals, have increasingly challenged that.
Iran also faces the threat that Trump has set a two-month deadline – expiring in May – for the talks to achieve an outcome. Iran, being a consummate negotiator, may test Trump’s patience, especially if Witkoff eventually demands its ballistic weapons programme and financial support for militant forces is also put on the agenda.
A February report by the International Atomic Energy Agency found that Iran’s stockpile of uranium enriched to 60% purity had increased sharply since December. Experts say that reaching 90% enrichment – the threshold for weapons-grade material – is relatively easy from that point. As of 8 February, Iran’s 60%-enriched uranium stockpile had grown by 92.5kg over the previous quarter, reaching 274.8kg. Iran says the stockpile is a response to US sanctions.
