Diplomatic efforts between Iran and the United States took a tentative step forward this week, as both nations engaged in indirect, mediated talks in Muscat, Oman, on February 6, 2026. While officials from both sides described the discussions as positive, the climate remains fraught with tension, military posturing, and deep-seated mistrust that has yet to be dispelled.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who led Tehran’s delegation, characterized the negotiations as “a good start,” emphasizing that the talks focused exclusively on Iran’s nuclear program. Speaking to Iranian television from Muscat after the session concluded, Araghchi noted that the decision on how to proceed would be made only after “consulting with the capitals.” He added, “There was almost a consensus on the continuation of talks and it was agreed they would continue.” According to Al Jazeera, he further clarified that Iran would not entertain discussions on ballistic missiles or regional armed groups, reiterating that such topics were a red line for Tehran.
On the American side, President Donald Trump echoed the cautiously optimistic tone. Addressing reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump called the indirect talks “very good” and said more were planned for early the following week. “They had a very good meeting with a very high representative of Iran, and we’ll see how it all turns out,” he remarked, adding a stern warning: “If they don’t make a deal, the consequences are very steep.” Trump was clear that any agreement must ensure Iran “could not be permitted to have nuclear weapons under any deal,” as reported by NBC News.
The U.S. delegation in Oman included special envoy Steve Witkoff, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, and U.S. Central Command chief Admiral Brad Cooper. Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi played a pivotal role as mediator, meeting separately with both delegations multiple times and conveying messages between them. According to Oman’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the consultations “focused on creating appropriate conditions for the resumption of diplomatic and technical negotiations.”
Despite these diplomatic overtures, the shadow of potential conflict looms large. The U.S. has recently moved the USS Abraham Lincoln supercarrier, along with supporting warships and fighter jets, near Iranian waters. Earlier in the week, a U.S. fighter jet shot down an Iranian drone that approached the carrier in the Arabian Sea—a move U.S. Central Command described as a response to “unclear intent.” These military maneuvers have heightened anxieties in the region, with Trump repeatedly warning of possible strikes if Iran does not acquiesce to U.S. demands.
Those demands are sweeping. The United States insists Iran must fully abandon uranium enrichment, even at the 3.67 percent civilian-use rate allowed under the 2015 nuclear deal—a deal Trump himself unilaterally withdrew from in 2018. Iran had previously enriched uranium up to 60 percent before its main nuclear facilities were damaged by U.S. bombing during the brief but intense Israel-Iran war in June 2025. Washington also seeks limits on Iran’s ballistic missile program and an end to Iranian support for armed groups in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, and Syria. Several European powers and Israel have voiced support for these conditions.
Tehran, however, remains adamant that only nuclear issues are up for negotiation. “We are not discussing any other issues with the Americans,” Araghchi told Iran’s official news agency IRNA, as cited by The New York Times. Iranian officials argue that the U.S. must lift sanctions and de-escalate threats of war before any progress can be made. Iran’s military, meanwhile, has underscored its readiness: on February 5, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) unveiled a test launch of the Khorramshahr-4 missile, capable of reaching Israel and U.S. bases in the region. Yadollah Javani, political deputy for the IRGC, stated, “Unveiling the missile means that although we have sat down at the negotiating table, we will not give up our military power.”
Public sentiment within Iran reflects the nation’s fraught mood. Some, like Soroush, a Tehran resident interviewed by Al Jazeera, hope the talks will ease the threat of war and economic hardship. “War not only brings fear and anxiety, but also doubles the economic pressure,” he said, referencing the country’s soaring inflation. Others, such as Maryam, are more pessimistic, believing the negotiations are doomed and will “definitely lead to war” due to the entrenched positions on both sides. Still others, frustrated by ongoing repression and instability, see escalation as a possible catalyst for change. “War is not a good thing, but the conditions we are living in now are, in many ways, larger and more severe than war itself,” said Amir from the capital. “I don’t think that with war something worse than what already exists will happen.”
The backdrop to these talks is a nation reeling from internal unrest. Mass protests erupted across Iran in late December 2025, sparked by economic grievances as the rial collapsed and inflation soared. The demonstrations quickly evolved into one of the most significant challenges to the Islamic Republic’s authority in nearly five decades. The government officially reports 3,117 deaths during the crackdown, blaming “terrorists” and “rioters” rather than state forces. However, international human rights organizations and the U.S.-based Human Rights Activists News Agency estimate the death toll is much higher—up to 6,955 confirmed deaths, with more than 50,000 arrests, according to their network of activists. The United Nations and other groups have documented widespread use of lethal force, including attacks on hospitals and medical staff assisting wounded protesters.
Adding to the pressure, the U.S. State Department announced fresh sanctions on February 6 targeting 15 entities, two individuals, and 14 vessels involved in Iran’s petroleum and petrochemical trade. A State Department statement accused the Iranian government of “prioritizing its destabilizing behavior over the safety and security of its own citizens, as demonstrated by the regime’s mass murder of peaceful protestors.”
Despite the fraught environment, both sides have signaled a willingness to continue talking. The U.S. administration, as Trump noted, is “in no rush” for a deal, drawing a parallel to his approach in Venezuela: “We waited around for a while.” Iran, for its part, insists that any agreement must recognize its “inalienable right” to nuclear enrichment, but Araghchi has indicated a readiness to reach a “reassuring agreement” with Washington on the issue, as reported by France 24.
Whether these cautious steps in Muscat mark the beginning of genuine de-escalation or merely a pause before further confrontation remains to be seen. For now, the region—and the world—watches and waits, hoping that diplomacy can succeed where threats and violence have failed.