Iran International
Tehran appears to be speaking in two voices about diplomacy with Washington: one calibrated for foreign capitals, the other aimed inward, shaped by fear, factionalism, and propaganda.
The widening gap between the two suggests not tactical ambiguity but strategic confusion—and it is most visible in the conduct of Iran’s foreign minister and chief negotiator, Abbas Araghchi.
Days after returning from Muscat, where he exchanged messages with US envoys in indirect talks, Araghchi embarked on an extended media tour at home, laying out rigid red lines that either were not conveyed to the Americans or were deliberately softened in private.
At home, Araghchi insists that Iran “will not stop enrichment,” that its stockpile of enriched uranium “will not be transferred to any other country,” and that it “will not negotiate about its missiles, now or in the future.”
Abroad, he has described the Muscat talks as “a good beginning” on a long path toward confidence-building.
The two messages are difficult to reconcile. Together, they suggest an intention to stretch out negotiations—an approach the United States under President Donald Trump has shown little interest in accommodating.
Even if these positions were not stated directly to US interlocutors, they have now been aired publicly. The question is no longer what Iran’s red lines are, but which audience Tehran believes matters more.
Other senior officials have reinforced the same internal message. Iran’s nuclear chief, Mohammad Eslami, said Tehran would be prepared to dilute its 60-percent enriched uranium only if all sanctions were lifted first—a familiar posture of maximum demands paired with minimal, reversible concessions.
This hardening rhetoric contrasts sharply with Iran’s underlying position.
Tehran enters these talks economically strained, diplomatically isolated, and politically shaken by the bloody crackdown on protests in January. Sweeping arrests of prominent moderates over the weekend have further narrowed the state’s already diminished base.
Still, for domestic audiences, defiance remains the preferred language. Hossein Shariatmadari, the hardline editor of Kayhan, warned after the Muscat talks that “the United States is not trustworthy” and urged officials to “keep our fingers on the trigger.”
State-affiliated outlets have amplified that tone, declaring the Oman talks a “political victory for Iran” without explaining what was won. State television has gone further, airing AI-generated footage portraying Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei as having “defeated” the United States.
More extreme claims have circulated as well. Ultraconservative lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian asserted on state television that Trump had “begged” Iranian commanders to allow a limited strike—echoing earlier efforts to recast confrontations with the US as evidence of dominance.
Taken together, these messages point to a leadership struggling to reconcile its external need for sanctions relief with its internal reliance on confrontation. Diplomacy abroad requires flexibility; legitimacy at home, the system appears to believe, still demands bravado.
It is the Supreme Leader who must ultimately arbitrate between these competing narratives. Ali Khamenei has long proven adept at sustaining both at once—and at bearing responsibility for neither. Whether he can repeat that balancing act one more time remains an open question.
Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi told reporters at a foreign policy conference in Tehran that Friday’s Muscat talks were limited to the nuclear file and that Iran would not negotiate on missiles or regional issues.
“Zero enrichment can never be accepted by us,” Araghchi said, adding that talks should focus on arrangements that allow enrichment in Iran.
“We need to focus on discussions that accept enrichment inside Iran while building trust that enrichment is and will remain for peaceful purposes.”
Araghchi said results of the Muscat round were being reviewed and that both sides were waiting for decisions in their capitals on whether to proceed, with any next round expected to remain indirect and potentially be held outside Oman.
“The results of the talks are under review,” Araghchi said. “The overall approach of both countries is to continue the talks, and we are waiting for decision-making in the capitals.”
He added that Iran would not negotiate its missile program or regional policies, pushing back against US calls to widen the agenda.
“The missile issue and regional issues have not been on the agenda and are not on the agenda,” Araghchi said.
Tehran’s top diplomat described the first Muscat meeting as a test of seriousness, adding that talks would continue only if Iran concluded the United States was acting in good faith.
“The first session was a trial of how much we can trust the other side.”
He also said Iran had increased consultations with regional states compared with past nuclear diplomacy, and that Tehran had kept Russia and China informed of the process.
Speaking at the same event, Kamal Kharazi, head of Iran’s Strategic Council on Foreign Relations and a former foreign minister, said Tehran’s foreign policy should prioritize ties with neighboring countries while maintaining what he called resistance to coercive pressure from adversaries.
Ali Akbar Salehi, a former foreign minister and senior nuclear official, argued that Iran faced a broader governance challenge in translating its revolutionary ideals with practical policy tools, adding that strengthening the domestic economy and modern capabilities would make Iran’s foreign policy more sustainable.
Saeed Khatibzadeh, head of the Foreign Ministry’s political and international studies center, said the conference aimed to bridge academia, industry and the foreign policy establishment.
Araghchi framed enrichment as tied to sovereignty, saying no outside power could dictate what Iran may possess, and argued that diplomacy could work only if Iran’s rights were respected.
The Muscat talks came amid high regional tensions and an expanded US military posture in the region.
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Sunday that the talks were a “step forward,” adding that Tehran wanted its rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to be respected.
