Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said indirect high-level talks with the US would be held in Oman on Saturday, hours after US President Donald Trump had said that “direct” discussions would take place.
Since Mr Trump sent a letter in early March to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to suggest talks, there have been disagreements over whether or not the discussions would be direct.
Mr Khamenei, who holds ultimate authority over foreign policy matters, has repeatedly expressed his opposition to holding direct talks with the Trump administration, which he blames for the collapse of the 2015 nuclear deal.
In a surprise announcement on Monday, Mr Trump said Washington and Tehran were poised to begin direct talks on Iran's nuclear programme, without specifying the location. “We're having direct talks with Iran, and they've started. It'll go on Saturday. We have a very big meeting and we'll see what can happen,” Mr Trump told reporters in the Oval Office during a meeting with visiting Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
While Mr Araghchi confirmed the date and location of the discussions, he insisted they would be indirect talks. “It is as much an opportunity as it is a test. The ball is in America's court," he said on X.
Oman, which maintains good relations with both the US and Iran, has played an important role as a key interlocutor between the two geopolitical foes. It did not comment on the upcoming talks.
In a further sign of the difficult path ahead to reach a deal between the two countries, Mr Trump warned that, if the talks are unsuccessful, “Iran is going to be in great danger”. Mr Trump, who has increased American military presence in the region since taking office in January, has said he would prefer striking a deal to armed confrontation with Iran.
“Iran cannot have a nuclear weapon and if the talks aren't successful I actually think it will be a very bad day for Iran,” Mr Trump said. “And I think everybody agrees that doing a deal would be preferable.”
His threats of military action come at a turbulent time for the region as Israeli strikes in Gaza and Lebanon continue and US bombardment of Yemen escalates. Iran's regional proxy network has come under unprecedented pressure since the war in Gaza, with leaders and officials being removed in targeted Israeli attacks over the past year.
In 2015, world powers, including the US, signed a deal with Iran putting limits on its nuclear programme in exchange for sanctions relief. Mr Trump withdrew the US from the deal during his first term and instituted a “maximum pressure” economic campaign against Iran, which he reinstated when he returned to office this year. The policy has been carried out through sanctions on Iranian interests as well as military action against Iranian proxies such as the Houthi rebels in Yemen.
The US and Iran returned to indirect talks under former US president Joe Biden's term but negotiations made very little progress. There is a growing consensus among Middle East and US officials that Iran’s long-standing strategy of projecting power through proxy militias, from Hezbollah in Lebanon to militias in Iraq and Yemen, is under unprecedented strain. With key allies suffering significant setbacks and Tehran absorbing blows across multiple fronts, many are now seeing a rare opportunity to begin unravelling its web of influence in the region.
The American side continues to emphasise that “all options are on the table”, including the possibility of military action if diplomacy fails to produce results on both the nuclear issue and Iran’s regional activities. Still, US and Middle Eastern officials continue advocating for a comprehensive, peaceful solution to permanently reduce tensions.
Mr Trump has repeatedly argued that indirect negotiations waste time and squander momentum. Iran, however, insists on using indirect channels, seeking to buy time and preserve leverage by involving its regional allies as bargaining chips.
Through backchannels and regional intermediaries, Iranian officials have recently expressed a willingness to negotiate, provided that initial discussions remain narrowly focused on the nuclear file before moving to other issues.
Inside Iran, analysts and academics are debating whether Tehran should fundamentally rethink its regional strategy. Some have told The National that the leadership is weighing up a shift that could see it scaling back on supporting armed militant groups in response to regional fatigue and rising costs. That debate has only intensified following the recent setbacks for Iran’s proxy forces.
Ending Iran’s decades-long role as a spoiler in conflicts from Lebanon to Yemen could unlock new paths to peace. In Gaza, for example, Iran’s long-time support for Hamas, whose rule now seems to many an obstacle to peace, is faltering. After a recent ceasefire expired and Israel resumed its offensive, Iranian commanders reportedly instructed their proxies to hold back, perhaps a signal that Tehran is looking for a way out, or at least a strategic pause.
The turning point may have come when an Israeli pager bomb attack in Lebanon last year shook Hezbollah to its core, killing dozens of members. Shortly after, Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, was killed in a major Israeli strike, along with other key figures. This sequence of events had a domino effect, leading to the eventual collapse of the Syrian regime.
Israeli and US intelligence successes have disrupted Tehran’s network, while the collapse of the Assad regime in Syria was a devastating blow to Iranian ambitions. Even Iran’s own territory has not been immune: Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh was assassinated in Tehran, and Israeli strikes have hit Iranian military targets in the country.
