Saed News: Some view certain U.S. actions as an attempt to strike a commanding pose ahead of the negotiations, while others see them as mere routine posturing. Nevertheless, it doesn't seem that Iran's foreign minister will have an easy task ahead in Oman.
According to the political service of Saed News, quoting Javan newspaper:
Some U.S. news agencies have reported that the U.S. State Department has informed Oman that if Iran does not agree to direct negotiations, Saturday’s talks will be canceled! The U.S. State Department spokesperson also stated, “We are not negotiating with Iran on Saturday; rather, we are clarifying what could potentially be achieved through negotiations.” Some interpret this behavior by the U.S. as an attempt to appear authoritative before the talks, while others view it as typical posturing. Nevertheless, it doesn’t seem that Iran’s Foreign Minister will have an easy task ahead in Oman.
While Donald Trump is insisting on holding “direct” negotiations with Iran in an assertive manner—and some media even suggest that Washington’s representative may cancel his trip to Oman if the talks are not direct—Iranian officials emphasize that the initial stage of the dialogue will be conducted “indirectly.” Araqchi has described this approach as a new opportunity for diplomacy and a test of the U.S.'s seriousness. These differences stem from the existing atmosphere of distrust and highlight the complex and winding path of dialogue between the two sides, underscoring the U.S.’s confrontational approach to negotiations from the outset.
With only two days left until the start of the Iran-U.S. negotiation marathon in Oman, the manner in which representatives of both countries will meet at the negotiating table remains a point of contention. U.S. President Donald Trump, known for his personal diplomacy and media spectacles, does not accept the involvement of intermediaries in the initial phase of talks with Iran over the nuclear program. In this context, The Washington Post reported Wednesday that Steve Witkoff, the U.S. President’s special envoy for Middle East affairs, would travel to Tehran if invited. However, the same outlet, citing U.S. officials, wrote: “Witkoff’s team has sent messages to Iran requesting direct talks through Oman, where a Saturday session is scheduled. If the negotiations are not direct, Witkoff may not go to Oman.” These U.S. officials, claiming they would not be deceived, argued that what is necessary to overcome the deep mistrust between the two parties is a “comprehensive discussion” and “mutual agreement.”
A well-informed source, reacting to the news of Witkoff’s possible canceled trip, stated it was being used for specific objectives and that Iran would not pay attention to artificial pressure.
Hours after this report—which sparked speculation about the possible cancellation of talks in Oman—the U.S. State Department released a statement indicating that, for now, whether the discussions with Tehran are direct or indirect is not the main issue for Washington. According to Al Jazeera, the U.S. State Department said yesterday about the indirect talks in Oman: “What will happen in Oman is not a negotiation, but a discussion to determine what might be achievable through negotiations.” The department added that President Trump’s remarks on the nature of the upcoming discussions with Iran in Oman are clear. It stated: “Steve Witkoff will be present in discussions with Iran. Our current policy focus regarding Iran is to prevent the country from obtaining nuclear weapons.” However, Politico has reported concerns that Witkoff may lack the political ability to negotiate with Iran and Russia.
While the Trump administration claims that direct talks could more quickly lead to an agreement with Iran and have positive outcomes for the region, Iranian Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araqchi has repeatedly emphasized that Saturday’s talks in Oman will be strictly indirect. On Tuesday night, during a meeting with Iranian embassy officials in Algeria, Araqchi said: “The nuclear issue means ensuring transparency and assurance about the peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions — and that is the only subject being discussed.” According to Fars News, in this meeting Araqchi, referring to recent developments and Iran’s readiness for indirect negotiations with the U.S., stressed: “The upcoming talks in Muscat represent a new opportunity for diplomacy and a test to assess America’s seriousness, which has a long record of untrustworthiness and unilateralism.”
This dispute over how negotiations should begin not only reflects the political tensions between the two countries but also highlights the strategic gap in their approaches to existing diplomatic crises. Iran, having experienced the bitter outcome of the U.S.’s withdrawal from the JCPOA under Trump’s previous term, now considers direct talks to be completely untrustworthy. Tehran has repeatedly emphasized that, given the current regional situation and Washington’s history of reneging on agreements, the only acceptable path is indirect negotiation through mediators like Oman. While Trump seeks a high-profile, media-driven agreement with Iran, Tehran has adopted a cautious, step-by-step strategy. Tehran believes that the U.S. cannot be trusted to honor agreements and that indirect negotiations provide better assurance of safeguarding its national interests.
Tehran has not entirely ruled out direct talks with Washington but has made them conditional. It says that the U.S. must show goodwill, abandon intimidation tactics, and speak to Iran with mutual respect before direct negotiations can begin. The U.S. and Israel are trying to impose their policies on Iran through bullying and coercion at the negotiation table, but Tehran’s officials have not yielded to these excessive demands. At the same time as declaring their readiness to engage in diplomacy, they are also preparing to counter any adventurism from their adversaries. Trump is pushing for an agreement with Iran that includes not just the nuclear issue but also defense and regional matters. However, Iranian officials have consistently stated over the past several years that they will only negotiate on the nuclear program and will not compromise on national interests.
From the perspective of some observers, Iran is trying to conduct the negotiations under pressure but on its own terms, as indirect talks give them the opportunity to maintain control over the situation without facing U.S. officials directly.
On the eve of the Tehran-Washington talks in Oman, other global actors have welcomed the move and expressed hope that the discussions will yield tangible results. A European Union spokesperson told ISNA on Wednesday regarding Brussels’ stance on the upcoming Muscat talks: “We have taken note of the announcement of talks between Iran and the United States. Any development that increases the chances of a diplomatic outcome is a step in the right direction, and we welcome it.” The EU diplomat added: “We reaffirm our commitment to a diplomatic solution as the only sustainable way to address Iran’s nuclear program. This was also emphasized recently by the EU’s High Representative at the UN Security Council.” He said: “We maintain direct communication channels with Iran.”
Maria Zakharova, spokesperson for the Russian Foreign Ministry, also responded to recent U.S. officials’ threatening remarks about Iran’s nuclear program, saying: “Bombing Iran will not pave the way for peace.” She added that Moscow hopes the negotiations between the U.S. and Iran will help prevent this crisis.
