The third round of discussions between Iran and the United States regarding Tehran’s nuclear activities wrapped up on Saturday after several hours of negotiations, which occurred both orally and in writing, involving senior officials and technical experts from both parties.
Iran’s Foreign Minister, Abbas Araghchi, shared in an interview with state television that the talks were “very serious”, concentrating on the specifics of a potential agreement. He acknowledged ongoing disagreements between Tehran and Washington but expressed a “cautious optimism” about making progress.
Araghchi indicated that negotiations would continue next Saturday, with Oman playing a mediating role, including involvement from Steve Witkoff, President Trump’s special envoy, and teams of experts. Although U.S. negotiators confirmed the continuation of discussions, a specific timeline was not provided, as stated by an anonymous senior American official involved in the sensitive negotiations.
“The atmosphere during the negotiations was both serious and productive,” he remarked. “We have moved past some larger issues, but this does not imply that all our disagreements are resolved.”
“We do have disagreements on various fronts,” he noted, “but discussions will be held in capital cities this week to work towards reducing these differences.”
The senior American official indicated that the next round would be hosted in Europe, with Oman continuing to facilitate. He described the previous round of talks, which lasted four hours, as productive.
According to another source familiar with the negotiations, the next session is likely to occur within two weeks; however, the U.S. needs time to analyze information and proposals from Iran. There’s also a desire to move talks closer to the United States, the source noted.
Both the U.S. and Iranian teams outlined frameworks for the discussions and covered various topics on Saturday, yet no agreements were reached, as per the source.
“I believe we will come to an agreement with Iran. No one else could achieve that,” Mr. Trump stated in a Friday interview with Time magazine, reflecting on his earlier decision to abandon a nuclear deal with Iran in 2018, labeling it as a flawed agreement.
These negotiations have the potential to alter both regional and global security by diminishing the likelihood of a U.S.-backed Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear sites and averting Iran’s development of nuclear weapons. A successful deal could also revitalize Iran’s economic and political climate by lifting American sanctions and attracting foreign investment.
What transpired on Saturday?
Steve Witkoff, Mr. Trump’s envoy to the Middle East; Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s foreign minister; and technical teams from both sides convened in Oman, which is mediating the discussions. Reports from Iranian state media indicate that the talks began around midday.
This round focused on specific “expert discussions,” uniting nuclear and financial teams from both sides to refine technical specifics, including the oversight of Iran’s nuclear facilities and the handling of its highly enriched uranium stockpiles, along with sanction relief.
Mr. Trump has defined the objective of the dialogues as the prevention of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons. However, officials from his administration have conveyed mixed signals about what this entails.
This narrower aim of obstructing Iran from acquiring nuclear arms does not address other concerns of Israel regarding Iran’s advanced missile program, its backing of proxy militias across the Middle East, and its hostility towards Israel.
Esmail Baghai, a spokesperson for the Iranian Foreign Ministry, stated on Saturday that discussions on Iran’s defense and missile capabilities have “not been and will not be included in indirect negotiations with the United States.”
What is at stake?
A fresh nuclear agreement could postpone or avert a larger conflict involving Iran, Israel, and the United States. Direct confrontations between Israel and Iran have intensified since the onset of the Gaza conflict on October 7, 2023.
According to the New York Times, Israel had been preparing to strike Iranian nuclear facilities as soon as next month, but Mr. Trump intervened, advocating for negotiations with Tehran instead.
In his interview with Time, Mr. Trump clarified that he did not deter Israel’s strike.
“However, I didn’t make it easy for them because I believe we can achieve a deal without an attack. I am hopeful,” he remarked. “Yet, we might have to resort to military action if Iran pursues a nuclear weapon.”
Iran has been enriching uranium to approximately 60 percent purity, which is close to the threshold necessary for weapons-grade material. The International Atomic Energy Agency reports that Iran possesses enough enriched uranium to potentially construct several bombs should it choose to pursue weaponization.
Iran maintains that its nuclear agenda is for peaceful purposes, and the I.A.E.A. has found no evidence pointing to weapons development.
In the event of an attack on its nuclear infrastructure, Iran has threatened severe retaliation and hinted at the possibility of withdrawing from the U.N. Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.
The future of Iran’s economy and its 90 million citizens hangs in balance.
Years of sanctions have led to rampant inflation — further intensified by economic mismanagement and corruption. Many Iranians are feeling trapped in a downward spiral and are hopeful that a U.S.-Iran deal could provide relief.
What transpired in earlier discussions?
The initial round of nuclear discussions took place in Oman two weeks ago, followed by a second round in Rome last weekend.
Both parties have indicated that the discussions have been constructive, and progress is being made.
Iranian representatives have expressed readiness to reduce uranium enrichment levels to those outlined in the 2015 agreement with the Obama administration — 3.67 percent — which is adequate for nuclear reactor fuel.
What are the main issues?
One contentious issue is whether Iran should be permitted to continue enriching uranium, which has divided Mr. Trump’s advisors.
Mr. Witkoff has suggested a possible agreement that might allow Iran to enrich uranium at non-threatening levels suitable for energy purposes, along with some oversight.
Recently, Secretary of State Marco Rubio suggested in a podcast that Iran could maintain a civilian nuclear program without domestic enrichment by importing enriched uranium, as other nations do.
Michael Waltz, the national security advisor, has advocated for the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program, a stance Iran has designated as unacceptable.
Mr. Araghchi, the foreign minister, indicated that Iran has invited the United States to invest in enhancing its nuclear program, proposing the construction of 19 additional reactors as a safeguard measure.
“The trillion-dollar opportunity that our economy presents may appeal to U.S. enterprises,” Mr. Araghchi asserted in a speech shared on social media. “This may include companies assisting us in generating clean energy from sources other than hydrocarbons.”
Agreeing to limits on Iran’s enriched uranium stock and enrichment levels subjects Mr. Trump to criticism that he would merely be rehashing key components of the Obama-era nuclear agreement, which he has denounced as “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into.”
Analysts propose that enhancing upon the Obama-era agreement could involve more stringent monitoring of Iran’s nuclear endeavors, initiating joint ventures for managing nuclear facilities, and making Iran’s guarantees permanent.
How did we arrive at this point?
The negotiating parties entered discussions with substantial distrust.
The preceding agreement between Iran and the United States, along with other global powers during the Obama administration, was known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.
It implemented constraints to prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons by capping uranium enrichment at 3.5 percent, transferring enriched uranium stockpiles to Russia, and permitting monitoring cameras and inspections by the I.A.E.A.
Post-implementation, European companies retreated from Iran, and banks ceased dealings with the country due to fears of U.S. sanctions.
About a year after Mr. Trump withdrew from the nuclear deal in 2018, Iran, seeing no financial advantages, began to diverge from its commitments and increased its uranium enrichment levels, ultimately reaching 60 percent.
What’s next?
Currently, both sides seem willing to reach a new agreement, with further discussions scheduled to take place.
Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who previously restricted negotiations with Mr. Trump, has now endorsed the talks and expressed his support for the negotiating team.
However, a deal may not be imminent.
Technical negotiations might still falter, a challenging aspect we encountered in prior discussions.
An interim agreement could still be possible, one that would freeze uranium enrichment while a final agreement is formulated.
Lara Jakes and David E. Sanger contributed reporting.