April 30, 2025

SHARE |

U.S. and Iran Start to Drill Down to Substance

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi Telegram messaging app channel via AP

As they did after the previous two rounds of talks that began April 12, U.S. and Iranian officials described Saturday’s direct and indirect discussions in Muscat, Oman, as positive and productive. U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East Steven Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi again led the discussions. In contrast to the prior two meetings, which officials characterized as discussions “at the 30,000-foot level” of generality, the Saturday meeting included exchanges of proposals between U.S. and Iranian experts. Both technical teams included specialists on the major aspects of a potential deal, including Iran’s nuclear program and the complex web of U.S.-led sanctions on Iran. The Iranian technical team was led by Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-e Ravanchi, who took part in the talks leading to the 2015 multilateral Iran nuclear agreement (JCPOA), and the U.S. expert group was led by Michael Anton, the director of the State Department’s policy planning staff. Anton is not known to have special expertise on nuclear proliferation or economic sanctions issues, but his team reportedly included officials from the U.S. Treasury Department, which administers U.S. sanctions, and the intelligence community, which watches Iran’s nuclear program intensively. The two sides agreed to meet again on May 3, in Europe.

The more substantive content of the talks was evident in official commentary after four hours of meetings. Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, who has served as mediator between the two sides at each meeting, carrying messages between them, posted on social media that the U.S. and Iran: “identified a shared aspiration to reach agreement based on mutual respect and enduring commitments…Core principles, objectives and technical concerns were all addressed.” After the conclusion of the meetings, Araghchi told Iranian state television that the parties exchanged written points throughout the day in discussions he described as "very serious and work-focused.” He added: “this time, the negotiations were much more serious than in the past, and we gradually entered into deeper and more detailed discussions,” noting that “the technical experts facilitated discussions…[in] more detail and [on] more technical topics.” Araghchi also said the process and pace of the nuclear talks was satisfactory, adding that both sides showed “seriousness and determination.” A senior U.S. administration official described the talks to journalists as positive and productive, adding: “There is still much to do, but further progress was made on getting to a deal.”

The readout of the session, particularly by the Iranian side, noted that the substantive exchanges revealed that the two sides continue to differ widely on an acceptable end stage of Iran’s uranium enrichment program. As a result, Iranian officials expressed more caution over the outcome of the negotiating process than they had after the previous two meetings. Araghchi stated following the Saturday round: "…it is not the case that all disagreements have been resolved. Differences still exist both on major issues and on the details." He added: “Both sides showed their will but sometimes will alone is not enough.” Araghchi further explained: “Today we exchanged written [questions and answers]. Some differences are serious, some less so…I'm hopeful about a deal, but cautious…we will return to our capitals for further reviews to see how disagreements can be reduced.”

Araghchi’s expression of caution seemed to reflect that U.S. officials were taking a harder line than they did prior to the previous rounds of talks. Trump’s national security team appears to have coalesced on the position initially outlined by Trump officials – that a new nuclear agreement needs to provide for Iran to dismantle, rather than shrink, its uranium enrichment infrastructure. In the days preceding the Saturday talks, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio reiterated that Iran would have to stop enriching uranium under a new agreement and import any enriched uranium it needed to fuel its sole functioning atomic energy plant, Bushehr. He stated to The Free Press: “There’s a pathway to a civil, peaceful nuclear program if they want one…But if they insist on enriching, then they will be the only country in the world that doesn’t have a ‘weapons program,’ quote-unquote, but is enriching … that’s problematic.” Rubio’s comments disappointed Iranian officials and global experts who interpreted earlier statements by Witkoff as demanding only that Iran revert to the terms of the 2015 JCPOA. Under that agreement, which Trump exited in 2018, during his first term, Iran was permitted to enrich uranium to 3.67 percent purity – the level needed to fuel an electricity-producing civilian nuclear reactor. Witkoff later, possibly under pressure from hardliners in the Trump team, retracted his more concessionary comments. Araghchi has repeatedly stated that dismantlement of Iran’s uranium enrichment program is “non-negotiable.”

No information has been released publicly to indicate how the two sides addressed this seemingly wide gap in their objectives during their Saturday meetings. Although both teams included experts on sanctions and international banking issues, no public comments by participants or other officials referenced whether sanctions relief was discussed on Saturday. Iranian leaders have indicated they expect, if anything, a greater degree of sanctions relief than the U.S. provided in the JCPOA. Iranian leaders complained that the JCPOA did not provide Iran with expanded access to dollar-denominated transactions, without which Iran’s economic recovery after a new agreement will be modest. Trump officials have not addressed whether they would be willing to accommodate Iran’s demand for greater access to dollar transactions in any new agreement.

Nor was it clear whether differences over the scope of an agreement had been bridged. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson, Esmaeil Baghaei, told Iranian state media that Iran’s defense capabilities and missile program were not on the agenda for Saturday’s talks. He stated: “The question of defense capacities and the country’s missiles is not [on the agenda] and has not been raised in the indirect talks.” However, Trump officials have not dropped their insistence that a new agreement include strict limits on Iran’s ability to field longer-range ballistic missiles. European states, some of which are already within range of Iran’s missile systems – the most advanced of which can travel 2,000 kilometers – have urged U.S. negotiators to include in a comprehensive deal a prohibition on Iran’s acquiring or finalizing the capacity to put a nuclear warhead on a ballistic missile, according to several European diplomats.

The latest round also took place in an environment of generally lower tensions, as Trump and his subordinates emphasized progress rather than the consequences for failure to reach a deal. Apparently hoping to record an early foreign policy success, Trump is expressing optimism for a settlement. After the Saturday round, Trump told reporters: “We’ve had a lot of talks with them, and I think we’re going to have a deal. I’d much rather have a deal than the other alternative. That would be good for humanity.” Still, Trump appeared to calculate that threats of military action were helping drive progress at the negotiating table. In an interview with Time Magazine on April 22, but released on Friday, Trump brushed aside the suggestion that the government of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be able to goad the U.S. into military action against Iran unless it agrees to eliminate its uranium enrichment infrastructure. He told the outlet: “There are some people (Netanyahu and other hardline Israeli leaders) that want to make a different kind of a deal — a much nastier deal — and I don’t want that to happen to Iran if we can avoid it.” He added that, if Iran fails to compromise, his administration would undertake action without prodding from other governments, stating: “If we don't make a deal, I'll be leading the pack (to strike Iran’s nuclear sites)." Still, global diplomats assess that Trump wants to achieve an agreement with Iran and adhere to his public promises not to initiate a new conflict in the Middle East.