Tag: World

When Donald Trump started his second term, it seemed like tensions with Iran were bound to escalate. His strong ties with Israel and Saudi Arabia—two of Iran’s biggest rivals—suggested a hardline approach was inevitable. But just a few months in, things have taken an unexpected turn.

Trump now appears focused on striking a deal with Tehran. In a surprising development, the United States and Iran have wrapped up their first round of nuclear talks in Oman. These discussions are the first substantial talks between the two nations since 2018, when Trump pulled the U.S. out of the original nuclear deal, promising to secure a better one. After years of stalled diplomacy, these renewed talks signal real progress toward a potential agreement—one that could not only change the Middle East but also reshape global geopolitics.

Optimism Grows After Positive Talks

The United States and Iran have both described their recent nuclear talks as constructive. The two-and-a-half-hour meeting was brief but respectful, laying the groundwork for further negotiations.

Iran’s chief negotiator, Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, spoke favorably about the discussions, noting they occurred in a calm and respectful setting without the use of inflammatory language. This tone suggests the U.S. delegation, led by Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff, avoided repeating earlier threats of military action.

Although the meeting was considered a success, it unfolded in an unusual format, with both delegations stationed in separate rooms and communicating through Oman’s Foreign Minister, Badr bin Hamad al-Busaidi. While it stopped short of a full face-to-face dialogue, Araghchi and Witkoff briefly spoke in Busaidi’s presence—a modest but symbolically significant gesture. Aware of political sensitivities at home, Iran downplayed the interaction and withheld any photographs.

Following the talks, the White House described the discussions as highly positive. Witkoff emphasized that he had been directed to pursue diplomacy and dialogue to resolve long-standing differences. The administration acknowledged the complexity of the issues but considered Witkoff’s direct communication a meaningful step toward a mutually beneficial outcome. Araghchi had earlier stated that Iran was committed to securing a fair agreement, while the U.S. reaffirmed the value of direct engagement as essential to reaching a possible deal.

Second Round Set for Next Week

A second round of nuclear talks is set for Saturday, marking progress toward a possible agreement. While Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi noted the next round may not be held in Oman, he confirmed that Oman would continue to mediate.

Both sides seem increasingly willing to engage, with the upcoming talks expected to build on momentum from President Trump’s recent letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader. Sent via the United Arab Emirates, the letter expressed Trump’s desire to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and to avoid potential U.S. or Israeli military action.

Trump disclosed the ongoing negotiations during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the White House on Monday. Netanyahu later stated that both leaders agreed Iran must never obtain nuclear weapons. He also proposed a “Libya-style” disarmament model—complete dismantlement of weapons programs—which Iran has firmly rejected.

Iran is instead seeking a deal that limits, but does not eliminate, its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Iranian officials continue to assert the peaceful nature of their program and insist that negotiations will focus solely on nuclear issues, excluding the country’s ballistic missile and broader defense capabilities.

What happens next? 

Uncertainty still surrounds whether the talks will lead to a favorable agreement, as both sides remain firmly committed to their core demands. Experts widely agree that both Iran and the United States need a deal, but any major compromise could trigger political backlash at home.

As it continues to pose a significant security concern for two of America’s closest allies in the region—Israel and Saudi Arabia—making it unlikely that the U.S. would support any deal that fails to address their concerns.

At the same time, analysts believe Iran has limited options. The country faces deep economic troubles, and its leaders are under growing pressure from a dissatisfied population. In recent years, Iran’s influence in the region has declined, especially in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and parts of Yemen. These losses have weakened Iran’s regional standing and challenged its image as a leader of the Islamic world—posing real risks to the future of the Islamic Republic.

For Iran, a nuclear deal could provide a crucial lifeline—offering relief from sanctions and easing domestic unrest. For the United States, it presents a chance to keep Iran’s nuclear ambitions in check. As a result, talks are expected to continue.

Iran is grappling with a worsening political and economic crisis. Over the past year, international setbacks have eroded its influence in the Middle East, while divisions between reformists and conservatives have sharpened. The economy is in turmoil, and growing public discontent poses an increasing challenge to the regime’s authority.

The election of moderate-reformist Masoud Pezeshkian after the death of Ebrahim Raisi was a major blow to conservatives, who have struggled to accept the outcome. From the start, the new government was on unstable footing, and tensions have now reached a breaking point. With no clear path forward, the country stands on the brink of deeper instability.

Amid this turmoil, Iran’s strongest adversary has made a dramatic move. In a surprising turn, U.S. President Donald Trump claims to have sent a letter to Iran’s leadership, proposing to restart nuclear negotiations. The move is especially striking given Trump’s own role in worsening Iran’s crisis during his first term—pulling out of the nuclear deal and imposing harsh sanctions that continue to strangle the economy. Now, as Iran struggles with internal and external pressure, Trump’s offer is widely seen as a calculated attempt to exploit Tehran’s vulnerabilities.

Political Crisis in Iran

Over the past month, Iran’s conservative-dominated parliament has flexed its power against the reformist-leaning administration, removing key figures from the government. It impeached and dismissed Abdolnaser Hemmati, the experienced economy minister, and forced out Mohammad Javad Zarif, the vice president and the most prominent reformist in the administration.

Both moves were clear challenges to President Masoud Pezeshkian’s authority. Yet, with the economy struggling under the weight of U.S. sanctions, the 85-year-old supreme leader, Ali Khamenei, has shown no intention of stepping in to support Pezeshkian.

Emboldened, the parliament is now summoning 11 more ministers for questioning, demanding answers to 49 inquiries about their performance—an apparent effort to further pressure and weaken Pezeshkian’s government.

Pezeshkian to Step Down?

Speculation is mounting that Masoud Pezeshkian, known for his emotional temperament and strong sense of integrity, may soon resign. If he does, his departure would serve as confirmation that Iran’s deep state—what some refer to as the shadow government—will not tolerate any shift in power.

Pezeshkian has made it clear whom he holds responsible for his predicament. In a remarkably candid speech, he finally asserted himself, revealing that he had advocated for negotiations with the West, only to be overruled by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. He admitted that the matter was settled and that no further discussions would take place.

He emphasized that his stance had always been in favor of negotiations, but now he had to follow the framework set by the supreme leader. He acknowledged that once the supreme leader determined a course of action, it was necessary to adapt to it and find a way forward.

Since taking office, Pezeshkian noted, his government has faced severe shortages in energy, water, and electricity, along with massive debts to the agricultural sector for wheat, the healthcare system, and pension payments. His efforts to ease pressure on women regarding the hijab have also met constant resistance. On Saturday, he issued yet another apology for ongoing energy shortages.

Trump’s Letter

While economic mismanagement and poverty dominate much of Iran’s political discourse, the deeper struggle remains its stance toward the West. Conservatives continue to see Trump and his ally, Israel, as not only untrustworthy but actively working toward regime change in Tehran. Just a week ago, there was little doubt that Trump had no intention of cooperating with Iran—he had repeatedly vowed harsher measures against the country and maintained a staunchly pro-Saudi Arabia and pro-Israel stance, dashing any hopes reformists had of engagement. But suddenly, a letter from Trump emerged, seeking talks—a move that raised hopes among reformists while stoking fears among conservatives that it could shift political momentum in their rivals’ favor.

If Trump’s letter imposes strict conditions for negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program, conservatives will argue that Washington’s demands are far too excessive. Yet, if Tehran rejects the offer outright, it risks escalating tensions to the point where an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear sites becomes increasingly likely. Meanwhile, greater economic sanctions would further devastate the lives of ordinary Iranians, potentially triggering mass protests against the regime—protests that could grow to a level capable of toppling the already unpopular Islamic Republic.

A Lifeline and a Trap

For reformists, however, the letter represents a lifeline—perhaps the only chance to rescue Iran’s ailing economy. They view negotiations as essential and believe they, rather than conservatives, are better suited to lead such talks. This means Trump’s move is not just about diplomacy; it is a direct challenge to Iran’s internal political balance, exacerbating the divide between reformists and conservatives.

Many in Iran see the letter as a calculated act of psychological warfare—an attempt to corner Tehran into either accepting difficult terms or rejecting talks entirely, further deepening domestic fractures and accelerating the crisis between Iran and the West. A well-laid trap, courtesy of Donald Trump.

Economic sanctions have become the most powerful weapon of the 21st century, replacing traditional warfare as real weapons now carry the risk of turning the earth to ashes. In this new battlefield, the United States—armed with the world’s most dominant economy—stands as the undisputed superpower. And now, at the helm, is a leader who wields this weapon with precision: Donald Trump. His primary target? The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Iran was dealt a severe blow last year, losing one of its most hardline presidents in a helicopter crash while simultaneously watching its influence erode in key regional strongholds like Syria and Lebanon. Meanwhile, internal fractures have deepened, particularly among the youth, who are increasingly torn between their Muslim and Persian identities—some even questioning the future of the Islamic Republic itself.

Now, Iran appears more vulnerable than ever as Trump escalates pressure, determined to punish Tehran while strengthening alliances with its regional adversaries, Israel and Saudi Arabia. These three powers have expanded their influence and remain unwavering in their effort to dismantle pro-Iranian groups in Yemen and Iraq.

With mounting internal unrest and relentless external pressure, Iran is at a crossroads: is it losing its foothold in the region? As Trump and Khamenei lock horns, their hardline stances are pushing the U.S. and Iran ever closer to a collision course—one that may redefine the balance of power in the Middle East.

Europe, once a key diplomatic bridge between Iran and the US, finds itself increasingly sidelined as Trump reasserts his dominance on the global stage. Having maintained dialogue with Tehran even after Trump abandoned negotiations in his last term, Europe is now losing its leverage in international politics. With Washington tightening its grip, Tehran sees little prospect for renewed discussions or a return to the nuclear agreement.

In response to Trump’s mounting pressure, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has adopted an increasingly defiant tone. During a visit to a defense exhibition in Tehran on Wednesday, he urged the Iranian government to further expand its military capabilities. “Progress cannot be stopped,” he declared, warning against complacency. In a pointed message to adversaries, he added, “Today, our defensive power is well-known. Our enemies fear it.”

But in reality, Trump’s diplomatic overtures toward Khamenei, coupled with his administration’s relentless “maximum pressure” campaign, have considerably eroded the Supreme Leader’s standing. In recent weeks, several senior Iranian officials have shown a growing openness to direct negotiations with Washington. Khamenei’s firm opposition to reviving U.S.-Iran nuclear talks seems less about ideology and more about his weakening grip—both within Iran and across the region.

Nowadays, Khamenei’s primary concern is not foreign threats but the potential for domestic upheaval. His greatest fear is that Iran’s disillusioned silent majority could exploit the pressure from U.S. sanctions as an opportunity to rise against his leadership. His persistent anti-U.S. rhetoric is not merely an act of defiance—it is a strategic attempt to channel public frustration outward, portraying Washington as the root cause of Iran’s struggles to consolidate support.

The regime believes that any conflict with the U.S. could serve as a rallying point, uniting the nation against an external enemy and preserving the Islamic Republic’s grip on power. However, with the Trump administration unlikely to pursue a large-scale military confrontation, the weight of economic hardship caused by sanctions may fall directly on the regime. As living conditions deteriorate, more Iranians may begin to see the Supreme Leader—not Washington—as the true source of their suffering, further destabilizing the country.

Iran finds itself at one of its most precarious moments. Once the backbone of the Islamic regime, the country’s lower and middle-income groups are growing increasingly disillusioned as economic pressures mount. Tougher sanctions imposed by Trump will almost certainly deepen the strain, fueling public frustration and resentment. Simultaneously, a rising sense of Persian identity over Muslim identity—especially among the Iranian diaspora in the West—signals a broader ideological shift. Clashes between young Iranians and pro-Palestinian activists in Western cities highlight this evolving divide.

Inside Iran, protests against both the regime and Islam itself are becoming more frequent, despite the significant risks. As economic conditions worsen, dissent is likely to intensify, further destabilizing the country. Ethnic minority groups, already restless, could take advantage of the weakening central authority to assert greater control. Given this mounting pressure, Iran may have little choice but to consider diplomacy.

However, the regime remains reluctant to reopen talks with the U.S., fearing that any negotiations would require sweeping concessions to Trump on key issues. Yet, if economic engagement were to ease public hardship, the government might see it as a temporary lifeline—buying time to navigate the crisis and maintain its hold on power.

If Trump escalates pressure further by tightening restrictions on Russia and India—two of Iran’s crucial economic partners—the Islamic Republic’s survival will become even more uncertain. As economic conditions deteriorate, the Iranian people, faced with worsening hardship, may ultimately decide to take matters into their own hands—just as they have in the past.