Indirect talks between the United States and Iran regarding its nuclear program are showing signs of progress, with both sides demonstrating a willingness to compromise, though significant hurdles remain. The potential for a renewed agreement is tempered by disagreements over the scope of negotiations, particularly concerning Iran’s ballistic missile program and its regional activities. These ongoing discussions come at a time of heightened regional tensions, with the US increasing its military presence in the Middle East.
Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, who has been involved in mediation efforts, indicated that Washington appears “willing to tolerate Iranian enrichment within clearly set boundaries,” a shift from previous demands for complete cessation of enrichment activities. Though, a durable agreement hinges on whether the US and Iran can reconcile their differing views on what issues should be included in any final deal. The situation is further complicated by Israel’s strong opposition to a deal that doesn’t address Iran’s missile capabilities.
The renewed diplomacy follows indirect talks in Muscat, Oman, last week, facilitated by Turkey, Qatar, and Oman. Both Washington and Tehran described the discussions as a positive first step, but cautioned that major obstacles remain. The core issue revolves around the scope of the agreement, with Iran insisting negotiations focus solely on its nuclear dossier, while the US maintains any lasting deal must address ballistic missiles and support for armed groups across the Middle East.
According to Fidan, “The Iranians now recognize that they need to reach a deal with the Americans, and the Americans understand that the Iranians have certain limits. It’s pointless to strive to force them.” He added that he believes Tehran “genuinely wants to reach a real agreement” and could accept restrictions on enrichment levels and a strict inspections regime, similar to the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That agreement, which capped enrichment at 3.67 percent and sharply limited Iran’s stockpile, did not address missiles or regional proxies – omissions that have drawn criticism from Israel and Gulf states.
Concerns Over Iran’s Nuclear Stockpile
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has raised concerns about Iran’s current nuclear capabilities. IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi stated on Wednesday that inspectors have been denied access for months to three key enrichment sites. He as well reported that the agency estimates approximately 400 kilograms of uranium enriched to just above 60 percent purity remains at underground facilities, enough material to potentially manufacture a dozen nuclear devices. Grossi warned that physical inspection is crucial to verify the stockpile and assess proliferation risks.
Despite these concerns, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated on Wednesday that Iran is willing to open its nuclear sites to “any verification” to demonstrate it is not pursuing nuclear weapons, a move that would allow inspectors to assess the damage from previous strikes and account for the uranium stockpile.
Regional Implications and Potential for Conflict
Fidan cautioned against attempting to resolve all disputes simultaneously, arguing that while the US is primarily concerned with nuclear capabilities, “the other issues are closely tied to countries of the region, because missiles and proxies affect regional security.” He also warned that military action against Iran is unlikely to achieve regime change, suggesting that while infrastructure could be damaged, the political system would likely endure.
President Donald Trump’s position has been somewhat ambiguous. While insisting that missiles and regional activities should be part of any final deal, he has also suggested a nuclear-only agreement could be “acceptable” under certain circumstances. After meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Trump stated that negotiations would continue, but offered no guarantees of success.
Israel has consistently advocated for including Iran’s missile capabilities in negotiations, citing them as a direct and growing threat. Iran, however, maintains that its missile program is defensive and outside the scope of nuclear talks.
The path forward remains uncertain. The success of these negotiations will depend on the willingness of both the US and Iran to compromise and address the core concerns of all parties involved. The potential for escalation remains high, and a failure to reach an agreement could have significant consequences for regional stability.
As talks continue, the international community will be closely watching for signs of progress and potential setbacks. The coming weeks will be critical in determining whether a renewed nuclear agreement can be reached, or if the region is headed towards further conflict.
What are your thoughts on the ongoing negotiations? Share your comments below.
