The Iranian nuclear program, with its unprecedented implications for Middle Eastern peace and stability, has become the prominent foreign policy agenda of the Trump Administration, for which it has been employing a strategic statecraft combined with military strength and diplomacy. President Donald Trump claims that Iran has agreed to the conditions of nuclear negotiations with the United States. During a press conference, he described the recent talks between the two countries, which concluded in late April, as “very serious negotiations” aimed at achieving “long-term peace.” Reciprocally, the Iranian side, through the advisor to the Iranian Supreme Leader, told NBC News that Tehran is willing to negotiate on the nuclear Program in exchange for the lifting of the sanctions imposed on Iran.
Known for his bellicose and uninformed demeanor, President Trump has repeatedly insisted to the Iranian government that nuclear enrichment must be for civilian or other peaceful purposes
The United States’ policy towards Iran since the Obama administration has primarily been guided by a stick-and-carrot strategy. President Obama persuaded Iran to sign a nuclear deal in exchange for easing sanctions, which Tehran complied with. Currently, the American administration under President Trump is increasing pressure on Iran to negotiate a new nuclear deal. Known for his bellicose and uninformed demeanor, President Trump has repeatedly insisted to the Iranian government that nuclear enrichment must be for civilian or other peaceful purposes.
The deployment of American military assets and 5th-generation stealth fighters is part of America’s maximum pressure strategy to convince Iran that there is no room for nuclear weapons
Recently, the U.S. President vowed to strike Iranian nuclear facilities if Iran refuses to agree to the nuclear deal. “We’re not going to be making any nuclear dust in Iran,” Trump said in Doha after meeting with business leaders. To demonstrate American resolve to neutralize Iran’s nuclear ambitions and push it to the negotiation table, the U.S. President ordered the deployment of B-2 stealth bombers at the Diego Garcia military facility. The deployment of American military assets and 5th-generation stealth fighters is part of America’s maximum pressure strategy to convince Iran that there is no room for nuclear weapons.
Considering the urgency of nuclear non-proliferation and peace in the Middle East, the US has engaged with Tehran to discuss the possibility of reviving the JCPOA. The recent round of indirect talks, which took place in April 2025, was mediated by Oman, during which the two sides discussed various aspects of the Iranian nuclear program. The United States demanded that Iran should not enrich uranium beyond 60 percent, enhance cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and cease the sale of armed drones to Russia, which are being used in the Russia-Ukraine war. In return, the US offered to release Iranian assets held abroad through humanitarian channels and permit certain regional trade and economic activities.
The Iranian side firmly rejected the United States’ recent demands to halt uranium enrichment, a key point of contention in ongoing nuclear negotiations
The Iranian side firmly rejected the United States’ recent demands to halt uranium enrichment, a key point of contention in ongoing nuclear negotiations. Abbas Araghchi, the foreign minister of Iran, clarified that Tehran will continue its uranium enrichment activities regardless of whether a new nuclear deal is reached, asserting that Iranian uranium enrichment is solely for peaceful energy purposes. Similarly, Ayatollah Khamenei, the Supreme Leader of Iran, criticized the United States’ demands, terming them “excessive and outrageous” and expressing skepticism about the future of negotiations.
The Iranian and American positions underscore the complexities and challenges facing the current diplomatic efforts between the two nations
Although the talks yielded no immediate yet fruitful results, both sides decided to continue the diplomatic efforts. Iran remains committed to indirect negotiations; however, without a significant shift in the American approach, it has ruled out the possibility of direct talks with the United States. Tehran insists that uranium enrichment is its sovereign right under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, permitting low-level enrichment for non-weapons purposes. Conversely, the United States is making every effort to admonish Iran not to enrich uranium beyond the level of peaceful purposes. The Iranian and American positions underscore the complexities and challenges facing the current diplomatic efforts between the two nations.
The two sides are uncertain about the future of a nuclear agreement. However, the US Middle East Envoy, Steve Witkoff, termed the talks “encouraging.” In contrast, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi branded the diplomacy as “difficult but useful.” The current US-Iranian nuclear negotiations underscore that the nuclear deal is a complex task for both nations, due to American President Trump’s desire to secure an agreement that will prove him a dealmaker. In contrast, the Iranian leadership is more concerned with maintaining the regime’s survival, regional security, and preserving the regional balance of power.
American Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff stated that the Iranian enrichment program is a “red line” for the United States
The Iranian government clarified that Tehran could only engage directly with the United States for nuclear talks once sanctions on Iran are relaxed and threats to use military force are abated. The US categorically rejected the Iranian condition, saying that it would only agree to engage Tehran directly once the regime agrees to stop uranium enrichment. Conversely, Iranian sources confirmed that Tehran will follow a phased reduction in uranium enrichment. In response to the Iranian position, American Special Envoy for the Middle East Steve Witkoff stated that the Iranian enrichment program is a “red line” for the United States, and crossing this line would prompt the United States to take preventive and coercive measures not in Iran’s interest.
As part of its “maximum pressure” strategy, President Trump insisted that Iran must accept the offer and stop nuclear enrichment. During his visit to the Middle East, he stated that Iran has to “move quickly” to discuss a nuclear deal with the United States or “something bad is gonna happen”. On similar lines, White House Press Secretary Karolia Leavitt threatened Iran to accept the US demands, saying that “there will be all hell to pay” if the president’s demands are not met. Trump is beating war drums and threatening Iran by employing Ronald Reagan’s analogy, “peace through strength”.
Tehran insists on engaging other major players, including the European Union, China, and Russia, all of which have a significant voice in global multilateralism
Given America’s military supremacy and global hegemony, Trump believes that the US could secure a deal with Iran while flexing its military muscles. Nonetheless, the Iranian side is determined to safeguard the country’s sovereignty and national interests by inking a rational and more workable deal. For this purpose, Tehran insists on engaging other major players, including the European Union, China, and Russia, all of which have a significant voice in global multilateralism and an eagerness to conclude a deal that ensures the principle of global nuclear non-proliferation and safeguards Iran’s national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
The current scenario demands that the United States reconsider its approach towards Iran, respecting its security concerns, making Iran a credible member of a global community of states, and offering economic and trade incentives to support Tehran’s economic revival. Once Iran receives security guarantees and relief from various types of economic and diplomatic sanctions, the state of bilateral relations can improve, paving the way for a nuclear deal that satisfies both nations.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
