By Elsie Kamsiyochi
Senior US and Iranian officials have gathered in Geneva for a third round of indirect negotiations widely seen as pivotal in determining whether diplomacy can avert a fresh conflict in the Middle East.
The talks unfold against a backdrop of escalating rhetoric and an unprecedented American military build-up in the region, with President Donald Trump warning that Iran could face military strikes if a new nuclear agreement is not reached.
The negotiations, mediated by Oman, resumed on Thursday evening after an earlier three-hour session adjourned without a breakthrough.
Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi, whose country has long played the role of quiet intermediary between Washington and Tehran, described the exchanges as “creative and positive,” adding that both sides had shown “openness to new and creative ideas.” He said he hoped further progress could be made, though substantial gaps remain.
Delegations and Diplomatic Stakes
As in the previous rounds earlier this month, Iran’s delegation is led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, while the United States is represented by special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.
The talks are being held indirectly at the Omani ambassador’s residence in Geneva, with mediators relaying proposals between the two sides.
The discussions come at a moment of heightened tension. In recent weeks, the US has deployed thousands of additional troops, two aircraft carriers — including the USS Gerald R. Ford — along with supporting warships, fighter jets and refuelling aircraft to the Middle East. Trump has described the deployment as an “armada,” underscoring his administration’s readiness to escalate if diplomacy falters.
This marks the largest sustained US military build-up in the region since the 2003 invasion of Iraq, and regional governments are watching closely, wary that even a limited strike could spiral into a broader war.
Trump’s Demands and Iran’s Red Lines
While Trump has repeatedly said he prefers a diplomatic solution, he has also floated the possibility of a limited military strike to pressure Iran’s leadership.
In his recent State of the Union address, he accused Iran of attempting to revive its nuclear weapons ambitions after last year’s US and Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities — strikes he previously claimed had “obliterated” key sites.
However, the president has not clearly defined the precise conditions Washington requires for a deal. He has insisted that Iran must unequivocally declare it will “never have a nuclear weapon,” though Iranian officials have already stated publicly that the country will not pursue one.
Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is solely for peaceful purposes. Nevertheless, it remains the only non-nuclear-armed state to enrich uranium to near weapons-grade levels, a fact that has long alarmed the US and Israel.
Tehran has firmly rejected Washington’s demand that it cease uranium enrichment entirely on its own soil, calling such a requirement a violation of its sovereign rights.
Still, there are indications that Iran may be willing to offer concessions. Proposals under discussion reportedly include the formation of a regional consortium to manage uranium enrichment, as well as arrangements concerning Iran’s estimated 400kg stockpile of highly enriched uranium.
Verification and monitoring mechanisms — potentially involving renewed access for international inspectors — are also believed to be part of the talks.
In exchange, Tehran is seeking the lifting of crippling economic sanctions that have severely weakened its economy. Critics of Iran’s clerical leadership argue that sanctions relief would provide the regime with financial breathing room at a time of internal unrest.
Broader Security Concerns
The negotiations are taking place amid deep disagreements over issues beyond the nuclear file. The US has previously pressed Iran to limit its ballistic missile programme and end support for regional armed groups — including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Shia militias in Iraq and the Houthis in Yemen — collectively referred to by Tehran as the “Axis of Resistance.” Iranian officials have ruled out discussing these matters in the current talks.
Reports in US media suggest the White House has considered a range of military options, from targeted strikes on Iran’s Revolutionary Guards or nuclear facilities to, in the event of total diplomatic collapse, a broader campaign aimed at destabilising the country’s leadership under Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is said to have cautioned that strikes could carry significant risks, potentially drawing the US into a prolonged and unpredictable conflict.
Iran has responded with its own warnings, vowing to retaliate against American military assets in the Middle East and against Israel if attacked. Regional US allies have privately expressed concern that air power alone would be unlikely to bring about regime change and could ignite a wider war.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who recently visited Washington, has long argued that any agreement must address Iran’s missile capabilities and its regional proxies. Analysts believe Israel is pressing for a more comprehensive settlement — or, failing that, decisive action.
A Narrow Window for Diplomacy
The Geneva talks represent what Iranian officials have called a “historic opportunity” to reach an unprecedented agreement addressing mutual concerns.
Yet with both sides holding firm on key principles and military forces positioned across the region, the margin for miscalculation is slim.
For now, diplomats continue to shuttle proposals between delegations in Geneva, hoping that creative compromises can prevent a new chapter of conflict.
Whether these negotiations will produce a durable agreement — or merely delay confrontation remains uncertain. What is clear is that the decisions made in the coming days could reshape the security landscape of the Middle East for years to come.
Source BBC
Original article
Comments