Barring a last-minute surprise, and our subject has always been full of surprises, Iran and the United States are expected to resume their interrupted talks in Muscat today amid contradicting speculations about a possible outcome.
Both Tehran and Washington pretend that the long weeks during which the talks between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and US special envoy Steve Witkoff in Muscat and Rome were interrupted amounted to nothing more than an intermission.
US President Donald Trump talks of an “excellent outcome” while Iranian media express unprecedented optimism about the outcome of the talks.
However, the intermission of which both sides mention witnessed quite a few events that could put the talks on a different trajectory.
During that intermission, Iran witnessed unprecedented internal turmoil with nationwide protests provoking equally unprecedented repression. At one point it seemed as if Trump might order a military intervention to tip the balance in favor of protesters by ordering the assembly of a huge armada in waters close to Iran.
Two facts seem to have changed Trump’s mind about getting the US directly involved in the Iranian imbroglio. The first was remembering a notice seen in China shops: “If you break it, you own it!”
And that is precisely what the so-called Trump method has always tried to avoid.
In his first term, Trump negotiated the end of US involvement in Afghanistan after decades of costly but ultimately futile nation-building efforts.
In his current term, he has also launched a process of military disengagement from Iraq and Syria while settling for a supporting political role.
Trump has always been keen in securing at least part of what he wants in exchange for not doing what might hurt an adversary.
“Give me what I want and I won’t send the boys with baseball bats to break your bones,” is the message.
The second fact that may make the new round of talks different is the belated realization by the leadership in Tehran, or at least a part of it that the Islamic Republic cannot fight on two fronts, inside and outside.
It is significant that the initiative for resuming the talks came from Tehran albeit after a series of “consultations” with Russia and half a dozen regional nations notably Türkiye.
The US responded by demanding an enlargement of the topics to include Iran’s continued albeit much reduced support for its proxies, a curtailing of the range of its missile and “other regional issues,” a code for eventual normalization with Israel.
As might have been expected, that demand was rejected by Supreme Guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who in a speech threatened to provoke a regional war.
According to our sources he agreed to a resumption of talks on three conditions: that the initiative should come from President Masoud Pezeshkian, thus casting him as scapegoat in case of failure, that the talks retain the indirect format at least in the beginning, and that the nuclear project remain the sole issue on the agenda.
Much to the surprise of some commentators Washington agreed, a sure sign that Trump still hopes to achieve what seven US presidents failed to do by persuading Iran to transform itself from a vehicle for exporting revolution into a normal nation-state.
The new round of talks takes place in a new context marked by the exclusion of the European Union from a process that stared almost 20 years ago with Britain, Germany and France getting top billing. Their exclusion pleases Moscow, which might play a more active role persuading Tehran to be more accommodating.
Moscow may also help with solving the thorny problem of Iran’s huge stockpile of enriched uranium by agreeing their transfer to Russia.
At this stage, Tehran seems determined to offer minimum concessions including the ratification of the additional protocols of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) and a softening of the modalities of implementation of any accord reached.
Well, you might think that we are back in groundhog’s day, having been there, seen all that and bought the T-shirt.
No one could exclude the possibility that once again Tehran may be playing for time in the hope that mid-term elections in the US could take the wind off Trump’s sail.
At the other side of the table the Americans may also be playing for time for the multiple crises, including the ayatollah’s succession, the trajectory of the internal tensions and the dire economic situation that Iran faces to shape a credible outcome.
Even if a nuclear accord is somehow conjured, the so-called “Iran problem” would not disappear.
I have always maintained that the nuclear issue is a diversion from the core of the problem which is the need for Iran to re-become a normal member of the regional and international community pursuing the objectives of normal nation-states.
Trump seems to be betting on the possibility of using the talks as a means of keeping the Islamic Republic on track away from adventurism pending the emergence of forces that could shape a different trajectory for Iran.
The fact that almost all regional powers plus Russia and to some extent even China are now involved in goading Tehran away from adventurism may contribute to neutralizing factions within the regime that even now publicly denounce the talks and call for “staying in the course set by slain Gen. Qassem Soleimani.”
Those factions denounce what they claim is a new version of the 19th century gunboat diplomacy coming as aircraft-carrier diplomacy practiced by Trump.
The difference is that Trump isn’t interested in empire-building if only because despite decades of leftist propaganda the United States was never shaped as an imperialist power.
For the past eight decades, that is to say since the end of World War II, it has on occasions acted as guardian of the world order or even hegemon but never as a builder of empire.
The Muscat talks may end up as one of the dozen or so building sites started by Trump from Gaza to Greenland with the final shape still uncertain. We shall have to wait and see.
