AhlulBayt News Agency (ABNA): A new round of negotiations between the United States and Iran has commenced in Geneva, marking what observers describe as a sensitive diplomatic phase that could either reshape years of confrontation or lead to renewed instability and unpredictable consequences.
According to reports, a U.S. delegation, including Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, met Iranian representatives on Tuesday and Thursday of last week. The significance of the talks increased after U.S. President Donald Trump publicly stated, “I will be indirectly involved in these negotiations, and these discussions will be very important,” adding that Iran appears more motivated to negotiate at this stage.
Shift in Washington’s Tone and Activation of Back Channels
Trump’s remarks come amid months of a dual-track U.S. approach toward Tehran, combining pressure with diplomatic signaling. Analysts consider the president’s public acknowledgment of involvement in ongoing diplomacy an uncommon development, suggesting that previously undisclosed communication channels between the two sides have become active.
Parallel signals have also emerged from Tehran. Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi stated in an interview with a Western media outlet that Iran is prepared to examine compromise options aimed at achieving a nuclear agreement, provided Washington engages seriously on sanctions relief.
In addition, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran indicated last week that Tehran could consider diluting part of its highly enriched uranium stockpile in exchange for the full removal of financial sanctions.
Washington’s Priority: Preventing Nuclear Weaponization
At the same time, the Trump administration has shown indications of distancing itself from earlier rhetoric centered on regime change in Iran. U.S. Vice President J. D. Vance emphasized that Washington’s objective is limited to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, stating that Iran’s internal political future remains a matter for its own population.
This narrower policy position partially aligns with Tehran’s longstanding stance, particularly as earlier disputes had centered on U.S. demands for the complete cessation of uranium enrichment. The proposal to dilute high-enrichment reserves has now emerged as a potential middle-ground solution.
Netanyahu’s Explicit Opposition
However, Israel has expressed strong concern regarding any prospective agreement between Washington and Tehran. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated following his recent meeting with Trump at the White House that any agreement must include the total removal of enriched nuclear material from Iran and the dismantlement of all enrichment infrastructure.
He stressed that “not a temporary suspension, but the complete dismantling of equipment and infrastructure enabling enrichment” should form the basis of any deal.
Some reports suggest that discussions between Trump and Netanyahu were accompanied by disagreements, with the U.S. president reportedly emphasizing the necessity of allowing diplomatic negotiations to proceed and urging restraint from escalatory actions.
Risk of Negotiation Failure
Analysts believe Trump’s declaration of personal involvement effectively links part of his political credibility to the outcome of the negotiations. Failure of the talks could increase the likelihood of renewed tensions or a return to more coercive policy options.
From Washington’s perspective, the principal demand remains a binding Iranian commitment not to pursue nuclear weapons. Tehran, meanwhile, has repeatedly maintained that its nuclear program is peaceful in nature while prioritizing sanctions removal and reintegration into global economic markets.
Outlook
With diplomatic channels now active alongside visible differences between Washington and Tel Aviv, the Geneva negotiations may represent a turning point in regional dynamics. A mutually acceptable framework could reduce tensions, yet opposition from regional actors and domestic political complexities within both the United States and Israel continue to complicate prospects for a durable agreement.
Overall, the ongoing negotiations are viewed not only as a test of political will in Tehran and Washington but also as an assessment of Trump’s capacity to manage competing internal and external pressures—an outcome that could significantly shape the Middle East’s security balance in the years ahead.
**************
End/ 345A
