Washington DC — Iran and the US are engaged in crucial talks in Oman and Italy regarding Tehran's nuclear programme and the possible lifting of crippling sanctions, with Washington threatening that failure in diplomatic exercise could lead to US bombardment on Iranian nuclear sites.

Even as the first round of indirect talks in Muscat was deemed by the Iranian and American officials as "constructive", tensions rose immediately after US envoy Steve Witkoff called on Tehran to "totally eliminate" its nuclear programme to reach a deal with the Trump administration, ahead of the second round of talks in Rome.  

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi labelled Witkoff's remarks as "contradictory" and insisted that uranium enrichment is "non-negotiable," marking the initial roadblocks to the ongoing negotiations.

"It is a classic case of a Turkish or Persian bazaar, where bargaining, posturing, and even feigned disinterest often precede a final agreement. Expect a great deal of public uproar, but the real negotiations will take place behind closed doors," Mohsen Milani, a Professor of Politics at the University of South Florida, tells TRT World.

"We are in the pre-negotiation phase, and both sides have begun seriously strengthening their bargaining positions," says Milani, who is also the author of the recently released book Iran’s Rise and Rivalry with the US in the Middle East.

Interim nuclear deal possible?

Last Saturday, Muscat, Oman's capital, hosted a rare indirect meeting between the US and Iran for two intense hours. Witkoff and Araghchi sent representatives to negotiate with Omani officials serving as intermediaries.

Both sides were reticent about details. The Iranian delegation mentioned a brief chance encounter with US delegates at the conclusion.

The US demands Iran stop its nuclear programme and eliminate its enriched uranium. Iran seeks sanctions relief and re-entry into the global banking system while it keeps its civilian nuclear programme.

Amidst Israel's war on Gaza, Iran receiving setbacks in Syria and Lebanon, and increased US military presence in the region, a deal might be imminent.

"Iran's regional position has recently weakened, but it is not as vulnerable as often assumed. Its nuclear programme is now far more advanced than when the JCPOA was signed," Milani says.

"Neither US President Donald Trump nor Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei wants war, knowing the immense costs for both countries and the region. In this context, there is room for a permanent or interim nuclear deal, though serious obstacles could still derail negotiations and bring the two sides to the brink of conflict."

Trump walked back from JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), a 2015 deal between Iran and six developed countries — the US, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany — during his first term of office.

Under the deal from President Barack Obama's era, Iran agreed to limit uranium enrichment in exchange for lifted sanctions.

Trump pulled the US from the agreement unilaterally in 2018, calling it the worst deal ever and insisting he'd get a better one. That didn't happen, and Iran backed away from the accord.

Iran was permitted to enrich uranium up to 3.67 percent purity and hold a 300-kilogramme stockpile under JCPOA.

But after Trump withdrew from the accord and imposed stricter sanctions, Tehran resumed its nuclear activities, enriching uranium up to 60 percent, a technical step below the 90 percent needed for weapons grade uranium.

In February 2025, the UN's nuclear watchdog, IAEA, reported that Iran had accelerated its production of near weapons-grade uranium.

On Wednesday, IAEA head indicated that Iran is not far off from creating its own nuclear weapons.

Iran has enough material to produce many bombs but does not yet have nuclear weapons, Rafael Mariano Grossi told French daily Le Monde.

Grossi said: "It's like a jigsaw puzzle; they have the pieces and one day they can put it all together. There is a way to go to achieve this. But they are not far from it, we have to accept that. In the last four years, we have seen a remarkable acceleration in Iran in this area."

Tehran claims its nuclear enrichment is solely for civilian energy and accuses Trump of undermining the 2015 agreement.

In his second term, Trump is prioritising preventing Iran's nuclear weapons development, stating, Iran can prosper, but it must not have nuclear weapons.

Libya model highly unlikely 

"I've been involved in talks between Americans and Iranians for 35 years now, and I do have to say that the goal of the first meeting was to get to a second meeting, and that's now on the schedule," Thomas Warrick, a non-resident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic Council and Former Deputy Assistant Secretary at US Homeland Security, tells TRT World.

"So yes, that makes the first meeting a success. Everything else is atmospheric, but at least the talks have started and they are continuing, and that's going to allow us to get down to some very important, very difficult issues."

Before the pivotal Muscat talks, Iran's Araghchi indicated Tehran's readiness to negotiate a new nuclear deal with Trump, contingent on Washington's demonstration of goodwill.

Araghchi's reaction came after Trump surprised everyone in the White House, including Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu, when he announced the US is entering "direct talks" with Iran over its nuclear programme.

Trump has however sent mixed signals, ruling out another war in the Middle East but warning Iran of "great danger" if current talks fail.

And, Netanyahu — whose country is an arch foe of Iran and is believed to possess dozens of nuclear weapons but adheres to a policy of deliberate ambiguity — has threatened to use military option against Tehran if negotiations collapsed. 

Netanyahu, who has repeatedly demanded that US governments use strikes against Iran's nuclear programme, said Iran must completely dismantle its atomic programme the way Libya did.

The high-stakes talks are also occurring amid a significant US troop buildup in the region, with a potential military threat to Tehran looming.

The US military has launched its largest Middle East deployment since the onset of Israel's war in Gaza that began in October 2023.

Recently, Washington deployed fighter jets, stealth bombers, and significant weaponry to the region, while continuing its strikes in Yemen.

On Wednesday, Israeli broadcaster KAN reported that US cargo planes delivered weapons and munitions from global bases to Nevatim Airbase in southern Israel.

The shipments comprise MK-84 bombs and other munitions to support offensives in Gaza and prepare for a potential strike on Iran if US-Tehran nuclear talks falter, KAN reported.

"The shipments also include interceptor missiles designated for the US THAAD air defense systems deployed in the region," it added.

Warrick says Trump wants the new nuclear deal under his watch and that Iran is going to need to accept that "there will be a change in the regional security arrangements."

"Certainly, it has laid bare Iran’s military vulnerability after two Israeli strikes showed that foreign powers could attack anywhere in Iran they want without Tehran being able to stop it. So, the military dynamic is now very different from what it was in 2016."

Milani tells TRT World although the 2015 deal is practically dead, it can still serve as a useful framework for a new agreement, "one that addresses current realities on the ground, particularly Iran’s nuclear advancements, and can be presented as a win-win for both countries."

However, he says Iran has incurred tremendous economic and political costs to develop its nuclear programme and may not surrender or dismantle its entire nuclear facilities the way Libya did.

"It is highly unlikely that Tehran will peacefully agree to dismantle its entire nuclear infrastructure or submit to the so-called Libyan model," he says.  

Fissures within Trump team

The Trump team seems divided on strategies to achieve the desired goals.

Witkoff and Vice President JD Vance favour diplomacy while National Security Advisor Michael Waltz and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio prefer a maximalist approach to deal with Iran.

In fact, Witkoff recently suggested a compromise with Iran via a "verification programme" to prove no nuclear weapon pursuit. Waltz, however, insisted on "full dismantlement."

Could this split anyway influence the talks' outcome?

"Yes, it does," argues Milani, but adds "Disagreements or divisions within an American cabinet are not unusual."

The expert on US-Iran affairs says that during the 1979 Iranian Revolution, then US President Jimmy Carter's cabinet was deeply divided over how to deal with the revolutionary forces, "with one faction favouring concessions and the other advocating suppression."

"Today, the Trump administration is similarly divided between hawks and doves. The difference with the Carter years, however, is that Trump is a far more decisive leader than Carter, and he will ultimately determine US policy toward Iran himself."