Iran Rejects Direct Nuclear Talks with U.S., Favors Indirect Diplomacy through Oman
Amid escalating tensions and ongoing uncertainty over the future of nuclear international relations, Iran has firmly rejected the possibility of direct negotiations with the USA. This reaction follows current feedback by way of U.S. President Donald Trump, who expressed a desire for face-to-face dialogue with Iran, deeming it greater powerful than indirect engagement.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi dismissed the idea as futile, citing the U.S.’s records of contradictory messaging and threats of military action. “Direct talks make no sense with a rustic that constantly threatens to hotel to force in violation of the UN Charter,” Araghchi stated in an reputable statement. He reiterated Iran’s dedication to diplomacy but emphasized that negotiations should maintain via indirect channels.
Iran’s function become clarified quickly after Trump confirmed he had sent a letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei last month. The letter, delivered through the United Arab Emirates, referred to as for renewed negotiations however warned of army results if diplomatic efforts failed. Iran replied to the message through Oman, a rustic long acknowledged for mediating between the two nations.
Foreign Minister Araghchi referred to that Iran stays open to indirect talks and is prepared for all viable tendencies. “We are extreme in international relations, and similarly severe in defending our national sovereignty,” he said. The desire for indirect negotiations became echoed by a senior Iranian legitimate talking to Reuters, who indicated that such talks could offer an opportunity to evaluate the U.S.’s authentic commitment to a political answer.
The reputable explained that Iran might bear in mind starting up indirect discussions quickly if the United States demonstrates regular and positive messaging. Oman is anticipated to act as an intermediary, relaying communications between Tehran and Washington. High-level Iranian officials legal to take part inside the capability negotiations include Araghchi and his deputy, Majid Takht-e Ravanchi.
Despite the renewed talk of diplomacy, Iran’s army and political leaders are genuinely getting ready for all outcomes. Iran has warned neighboring nations that allowing U.S. Forces to use their airspace or territory for an assault might be viewed as direct hostility. “Such an act could have severe results for them,” the reliable warned, noting that Ayatollah Khamenei has positioned Iran’s militia on high alert.
The warning got here as a part of Iran’s broader strategic posture. Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander Amirali Hajizadeh these days implied that U.S. Army bases within the location could be centered if hostilities enhance. Similarly, senior political figures are signaling a hardline stance: Ali Larijani, an guide to the Supreme Leader, warned that at the same time as Iran does no longer currently are seeking for nuclear weapons, it can pursue them if attacked.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian also weighed in, announcing his country is open to dialogue—but only on same phrases. He expressed skepticism about the sincerity of U.S. Intentions, asking, “If you want negotiations, then what is the point of threatening?” His remarks spotlight a growing mistrust in Tehran over Washington’s shifting rhetoric and actions.
Despite the difficult language, Iran insists its desires are peaceful. General Mohammad Bagheri, leader of staff of the Iranian militia, reiterated the country’s dedication to nearby peace. “We are not those who begin wars, however we can respond to any threat with all our might,” he said, reinforcing the view that Iran’s army readiness is a deterrent rather than a provocation.
Diplomatic ties between Iran and the U.S. Had been severed for the reason that 1979 Islamic Revolution. However, backchannel communications through countries like Oman have every so often bridged the divide, particularly at some point of touchy negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program.
As each international locations weigh their subsequent steps, the direction ahead appears unsure. While Iran has left the door open for indirect international relations, any progress will depend upon how the U.S. Navigates its strategy—balancing stress with persuasion. The coming weeks ought to prove pivotal in determining whether a renewed diplomatic track can be cast, or if the region is headed toward deeper war of words.
