Prospects for U.S.-Iran Negotiations on the Nuclear Program

Viktor Mikhin, New Eastern Outlook, May 06, 2025 ─ 

At present, several rounds of indirect talks between the U.S. and Iran have taken place in Oman and Italy, with more meetings planned.

But what would constitute a good deal for Iran, the U.S., Israel, and the unstable countries of the region? Capping uranium enrichment at 4% purity—something Iran might agree to while retaining the ability to ramp up production if needed—would be an ideal solution. Preserving its modernized centrifuge systems and possibly accepting a monitoring and inspection regime in return would be a victory, regardless of what happens with its advanced ballistic missile program. Of course, all sanctions would also have to be lifted.

From Iran’s perspective, the worst-case scenario that would satisfy Israel would be an agreement requiring Iran to abandon its entire nuclear infrastructure and its 60%-enriched uranium. This would resemble the 2003 deal in which Libya surrendered its nuclear, chemical, biological, and ballistic missile programs in exchange for full rehabilitation. But everyone, especially in Iran, remembers all too well how that turned out. The West can only offer hollow promises—not keep them—and the world has long since learned this lesson.

Iran’s Clear Stance on the Deal 

Tehran’s official position boils down to two key demands. First, Iran insists on the lifting of sanctions that have severely damaged its economy, particularly in the oil and banking sectors. Second, Iranian authorities demand recognition of their nuclear rights, emphasizing the exclusively peaceful nature of their atomic program.

However, behind these statements may lie more pragmatic calculations. The negotiation process allows Tehran to ease its international isolation, reduce Western pressure, and possibly buy time to further advance its nuclear technology.

The chances of reaching a comprehensive agreement remain slim. The U.S. and its allies demand strict limits on uranium enrichment and full cooperation with the IAEA from Iran. In turn, based on previous rounds of talks, Tehran appears unwilling to make major concessions without guaranteed sanctions relief.

Nevertheless, Oman could serve as a venue for an “interim arrangement.” For example, a partial unfreezing of Iranian assets in exchange for a freeze on enrichment levels might be possible. However, a full return to compliance with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is unlikely without more decisive steps from both sides.

Several factors have influenced Iran’s decision to resume dialogue. The economic crisis, exacerbated by sanctions, inflation, and growing social discontent, is forcing the regime to seek ways to alleviate pressure. The regional situation also plays a role: the strengthening positions of Israel and Arab states are pushing Tehran to avoid further escalation. Moreover, even among Iranian conservatives, there is growing recognition that complete isolation harms the country’s long-term interests.

Can Trump Succeed in Negotiations with Iran? 

The talks on Iran’s nuclear program are one of the most complex diplomatic challenges of our time. If Donald Trump is truly serious about negotiating with Tehran, three key factors will determine the outcome: his willingness to reach a deal, the potential for compromise, and—most importantly—the sincerity of both sides.

Trump is known for his unpredictability, but his goal regarding Iran has always been clear: either radically revise the “deal of the century” (JCPOA) struck under Obama or replace it with a tougher alternative. However, after the failure of the “maximum pressure” policy and rising tensions in the Persian Gulf, Washington may now have a motive for genuine dialogue.

But does Trump actually want this? If these talks are merely a political maneuver or a tactical pause, the chances of success are minimal. If, however, he is truly prepared for pragmatic compromise, the deadlock could be broken.

Iran, weakened by sanctions but consolidating its regional influence, is also balancing between defiance and the need for economic relief. Oman, traditionally a mediator, could foster a constructive atmosphere—but mutual concessions remain essential.

– Can Trump offer Tehran partial sanctions relief in exchange for a freeze on its nuclear program?

– Is Iran willing to accept new restrictions if Washington guarantees compliance?

Without answers to these questions, the negotiations risk becoming little more than a performative gesture.

Sincerity: Who Can Be Trusted?  The main stumbling block is trust. Trump has repeatedly shown disregard for international agreements (withdrawing from the JCPOA, the Paris Climate Accord), while Iranian leadership has long accused the U.S. of bad faith. If the two sides cannot establish even minimal mutual recognition of each other’s interests, even the most carefully crafted diplomacy will prove futile.

Is There a Chance for Success? 

As long as both sides remain entrenched in their positions, a breakthrough seems unlikely. However, the mere fact that talks continue suggests the dialogue is not yet exhausted. If Tehran is genuinely interested in a deal—rather than merely simulating negotiations—it will have to show flexibility. Otherwise, the current talks will become just another episode in a drawn-out confrontation.

It could be said that Iran approached negotiations not out of a desire for disarmament but for pragmatic reasons. Success will depend on Washington’s willingness to compromise—and on how far Tehran is truly capable of going.

The history of negotiations with Iran shows that breakthroughs are possible, but only if both sides genuinely want an agreement. For now, the rhetoric from both Washington and Tehran remains tough, and time is running out.

If Trump can combine his usual assertiveness with flexibility, and if Iran sees real benefits in the talks, Oman could become the site of a historic deal. But if each side waits for the other to capitulate, the negotiations will devolve into yet another fruitless standoff.

Currently, politicians and the global press offer a wide range of predictions about the ongoing talks. But they all agree on one thing: there is a chance, but it is fragile—and depends not so much on diplomatic skill as on the political will of U.S. and Iranian leadership.