Live updates: Follow the latest news on US-Iran war
The US and Iran have held at least eight rounds of talks over the past year alone, none of which was able to avert the current war engulfing the Middle East.
As the race between diplomacy and further escalation comes to a head, experts warn that future talks must be built on a different foundation if they are to succeed.
With both warring parties seeking a “face-saving exit”, Tehran needs to make significant concessions on its nuclear programme, ballistic missiles and regional proxies, analysts say, while the Trump administration needs to change its “video game” approach to war and prove to be a trustworthy dialogue partner.
“To have a final, all-encompassing resolution to this conflict, there are three major files that need to be addressed: the nuclear file, the ballistic missiles file and the proxy file,” Karim Bitar, lecturer in Middle East Studies at Sciences Po Paris, told The National.
However, with the war intensifying, the prospect of an agreement appears to be receding by the day. Tehran is seeking minimal concessions, while US President Donald Trump and Israel appear intent on using the conflict to maximise pressure and military gains.
A series of diplomatic efforts over recent days has produced conflicting signals from both sides, alternating between claims that talks are under way and outright denials, a mixed messaging that is now part of a pattern of “bluff diplomacy” on foreign policy under the Trump administration.
“Both sides remain in a maximalist phase, convinced that time and controlled military escalation favour their position,” said Randa Slim, director of the Middle East programmes at the Stimson Centre in Washington.
“Tehran appears to be betting on war fatigue setting in among populations in the Gulf and in Israel. Meanwhile, the US administration continues to believe that sustained pressure will sufficiently weaken the regime, pushing it towards a deal as a means of ensuring its survival,” she told The National.
Diplomatic betrayal
Tehran has long insisted that its ballistic missile programme and support for regional proxies are non-negotiable, framing them as core elements of its defence strategy. Instead, it has signalled flexibility on nuclear issues, indicating willingness to discuss the fate of uranium enrichment and increased oversight as part of any deal.
When Tehran returned to the negotiating table in February, talks in Geneva on February 26 made “significant progress”, according to mediator Oman. As the US assembled the largest military build-up in decades in the Middle East, Muscat hailed a “breakthrough that has never been achieved before”.
“If the ultimate objective is to ensure forever that Iran cannot have a nuclear bomb, I think we have cracked that problem through these negotiations,” Oman's foreign minister Badr Albusaidi said on February 27.
That was a day before the US and Israel began bombing Iran.
While Tehran has signalled openness to negotiations in recent exchanges with mediators, it has yet again conveyed what it wants to discuss and what it doesn't, according to a political source close to Tehran.
“Iran has maintained a firm position that its missile programme is not up for negotiation,” said the source. “Tehran believes that what it sees as two instances of diplomatic betrayal by the US has reinforced the stance of the hardline camp that the US cannot be trusted.”
Iran had been attacked by Israel and the US while in the midst of nuclear talks before. The first round of negotiations was derailed last June when Israel launched a surprise wave of strikes on Tehran, resulting in a 12-day war. The US also attacked three Iranian nuclear sites on June 22, before Mr Trump announced a ceasefire after claiming his military “obliterated” Iran's nuclear capabilities.
Iran “argues that after enduring this war and its heavy losses, it will not return to negotiations only to concede its nuclear facilities or scientific capabilities. What it rejected before the war, it will not accept after everything that has happened,” added the source.
“Negotiations in principle are not rejected, but Iran says any process must be built on credible guarantees that war will not be repeated against it by the US and Israel.”
The extra mile
The intensity of the current war, combined with Iran’s losses and growing concern that the conflict could continue until regime change is at least attempted on the ground, may open limited space for flexibility, particularly on issues Tehran has long treated as red lines.
These concessions are key not only to the US but also to Gulf states that have borne the brunt of Iran's retaliation to US-Israeli attacks.
Mr Bitar said Iran was “ready to go the extra mile to make significant concessions” on these dossiers if it meant upholding the regime. According to Axios, the US is considering sending 10,000 additional combat troops to the Middle East in the coming days. Mr Trump said on Thursday he has given Iran until April 6 to negotiate and reach a deal before bombing its energy plants.
“I think the Iranians would be ready to make significant concessions on the nuclear dossier, including on the uranium,” said Mr Bitar.
“Iran is also, to a lesser extent, ready to make concessions on the ballistic missiles dossier. And to not completely stop its support to its proxies, but to progressively make sure that these proxies no longer act aggressively, as long as Iranians feel that they no longer need the deterrence that these proxies can offer.”
In return, Tehran would have to be “offered the preservation of their regime, or at least a face-saving exit,” Mr Bitar explained. “Face-saving is fundamental for the Iranians. They do not want to give the impression that they capitulated on all three files.”
Mr Trump, on the other hand, also needs to make a case to justify the costly war domestically. Dissatisfaction with his foreign policy is growing. The Pentagon has spent nearly $2 billion a day in the war and is asking Congress for $200 billion in additional money.
“Mr Trump has deployed a massive armada, a use of force that is unprecedented,” said Mr Bitar. “He needs to be able to tell public opinion that he got something out of it.”
The US President said on Thursday that Iran had given the US a “present” of 10 oil tankers as a gesture of goodwill.
“If he gets some sort of energy deal and concessions on the nukes, ballistic missiles and proxies, it would be much easier for him to sell the war to US public opinion before the midterms,” said Mr Bitar.
No trust, no strategy
While Mr Trump said he held “perfect talks” with Iran, a claim Tehran denies, his administration's push to send thousands more troops to the region suggests escalation is likely. It has also been interpreted as a US strategy to force Iran's hand into accepting an agreement on its terms.
The White House said on Wednesday that if Iran “fails to accept the reality of the current moment”, the US will hit it harder than ever before.
“I'm not sure there is a clear negotiation strategy on the US side. I'm not sure the bravado and braggadocio we are seeing on the US side will actually help the negotiation process. This video game approach to a war that is wreaking havoc in the entire region is really problematic," Mr Bitar said.
The continuing conflict has had far-reaching consequences regionally and globally, and experts believe a deal is still a long way off. Rebuilding the trust needed to reach a new round of talks will also be far from easy.
Ms Slim said any upcoming negotiations would be a “tool for managing escalation rather than as a pathway – at least in the near term – to a durable, comprehensive settlement”.
“A mutually hurting stalemate will probably be the key factor in bringing both sides to the negotiating table,” she added. “But I do not believe either party has reached that stage.”
