Will nuclear talks with Iran fall apart?
On Monday, President Donald Trump announced that the United States would be holding direct talks with Iranian leaders about their nuclear program this weekend in Oman. At the same time, Iran's foreign minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, insisted that the talks be 'indirect,' with the Omanis mediating, as a confidence-building measure. I'm joined by my colleagues David Ignatius and Jason Rezaian to discuss where things stand.
💬 💬 💬
Damir Marusic David, in your latest column, you reported that the Trump administration is demanding direct talks or nothing. Are the talks still on as far as we know?
David Ignatius I queried the Trump negotiating team to see whether they're packing their bags for Oman. At this point, I have no reason to think the talks won't happen. Someone close to the team stressed to me that they want direct talks because, given the mistrust between the two countries, they think it's necessary to have deep and frank discussions; Araghchi seems to prefer indirect talks as a way of dealing with this same problem of mistrust. This sounds like a problem that probably can be resolved. Although, the format might be fudged so that each side can claim it got what it wanted.
Jason Rezaian In Trump's first term, there was no direct contact after he pulled the U.S. out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. As a result — coupled with the administration's 'maximum pressure' approach — we lost a lot of leverage. I think directness, for the new Trump team, signals a seriousness that wasn't there the last time around. For the Iranians, playing hard to get looks good to the 'hardest-line' crowd. In the end, I think there will be direct meetings.
Damir Jason, how is this playing out in Iran? What is the media saying?
Jason For years, there have been two camps within Iran's media landscape: those who want zero discussion with America, because it means bending to the will of the Great Satan, and those who believe that only through some sort of agreement with America can Iran escape the existential threat of economic destruction. That camp is winning the internal debate right now.
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Damir Trump is threatening violence if the talks don't happen — presumably as a coercive technique for the talks themselves. There was a lot of buzz in Washington ahead of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit on Monday about the possibility of us bombing Iran. But is the threat of strikes credible, given the state of the world economy? Surely a war in the Persian Gulf would spike oil prices, spreading further chaos in markets.
Jason The threat of strikes is always credible, especially because Israel has shown the ability to damage Iranian targets, inside and outside Iran's borders. That fear is enough to get Iran to the table. But I don't believe Trump wants to get involved in military actions against Iran; it didn't benefit him during his first term. He undid the JCPOA, President Joe Biden failed to renew it, and now Trump sees an opportunity to 'win' Iran.
David We should take Trump at his word when he says he doesn't want more wars in the Middle East — partly because of the oil price spike and partly because he understands that MAGA voters are sick of 'endless wars.' That said, from the beginning, Trump has accompanied his enthusiasm for negotiations with a warning that military action will follow if the talks are not successful. He's even put a two-month deadline for the talks, which is more a symbolic timeline than a real one, I suspect. But he said Wednesday that if military force is used, Israel would take the lead, which I found an unusually specific statement — he doesn't want the United States to be in the lead.
Damir Can we destroy Iran's nuclear program with just airstrikes? Or is damaging it enough?
David With deep penetrating bombs, Israel and the U.S. could destroy much of the advanced centrifuge array buried at Iran's Fordow facility. But the Iranians have dispersed their program, so it would be very hard to get everything — even if the attack included covert Israeli commando operations. A big bombing attack could keep the Iranians out of the nuclear game for several years, max. The centrifuges could be replaced or repaired, and the real heart of the Iranian program is its scientific expertise — which you can't really bomb.
Story continues below advertisement
Advertisement
Damir The Israelis want full denuclearization from Iran. I imagine the Iranians would only agree to something far short of that. Any sense of where the Trump administration is on this question? Is a middle-ground outcome even possible, or is this 'negotiation' basically a standoff?
Jason I don't see the Iranians ever agreeing to completely abandon their nuclear program. They're too invested in it as a point of national pride, and massive treasure, to let it go.
David There's real tension between the U.S. and Israeli positions, and it will be fascinating to watch as these talks move forward, with a regular gush of leaks to influence negotiations. Israelis have been telling me since January — when they saw the Trump negotiating train gathering speed — that they would only settle for a 'Libya-style deal': a level of full dismantlement that Iran probably couldn't accept. That's one reason to be skeptical these negotiations will produce anything. I think the Israelis are concerned that Trump is so excited about the diplomatic possibilities that he is weakening the military option, at a time when Israel thinks there is a unique window of opportunity to strike Iran's nuclear program, because Iranian defenses are battered after last October's systematic attacks on its radar and missile production facilities.
Damir Heading into this, how optimistic are you that we'll have some kind of breakthrough? Trump clearly wants a big win. Can he get it?
David Trump is hungry for a big, showy breakthrough — remember his trip to North Korea, Singapore and Vietnam to meet Kim Jong Un! That's one reason to be optimistic. As my friend Karim Sadjadpour of the Carnegie Endowment reminded me this week, the worst nightmare for Trump hard-liners is that Iran's ayatollah will write Trump a letter saying, 'Let's get together in Dubai.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
16 minutes ago
Trump administration imposes limits on Mexican flights and threatens Delta alliance in trade dispute
The Trump administration imposed new restrictions Saturday on flights from Mexico and threatened to end a longstanding partnership between Delta Air Lines and Aeromexico in response to limits the Mexican government placed on passenger and cargo flights into Mexico City several years ago. Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy said Mexico's actions to force airlines to move out of the main Benito Juarez International Airport to the newer Felipe Angeles International Airport more than 30 miles (48.28 kilometers) away violated a trade agreement between the two countries and gave domestic airlines an unfair advantage. Mexico is the top foreign destination for Americans with more than 40 million passengers flying there last year. "Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg deliberately allowed Mexico to break our bilateral aviation agreement,' Duffy said, referring to the previous president and his transportation secretary. 'That ends today. Let these actions serve as a warning to any country who thinks it can take advantage of the U.S., our carriers, and our market. America First means fighting for the fundamental principle of fairness.' All Mexican passenger, cargo and charter airlines will now be required to submit their schedules to the Transportation Department and seek government approval of their flights until Duffy is satisfied with the way Mexico is treating U.S. airlines. It's not immediately clear how Duffy's actions might affect the broader trade war with Mexico and negotiations over tariffs. A spokesperson for Mexico's President Claudia Sheinbaum didn't reply immediately to a request for comment. Sheinbaum didn't mention the new restrictions during either of her two speaking events on Saturday. Delta and Aeromexico have been fighting the Transportation Department's efforts to end their partnership that began in 2016 since early last year. The airlines have argued that it's not fair to punish them for the Mexican government's actions, and they said ending their agreement would jeopardize nearly two dozen routes and $800 million in benefits to both countries' economies that come from tourism spending and jobs. 'The U.S. Department of Transportation's tentative proposal to terminate its approval of the strategic and pro-competitive partnership between Delta and Aeromexico would cause significant harm to consumers traveling between the U.S. and Mexico, as well as U.S. jobs, communities, and transborder competition," Delta said in a statement. Aeromexico's press office said it was reviewing the order and intended to present a joint response with Delta in the coming days. But the order terminating approval of the agreement between the airlines wouldn't take effect until October, and the airlines are likely to continue fighting that decision. The airlines said in a previous filing fighting the order that it believes the loss of direct flights would prompt over 140,000 American tourists and nearly 90,000 Mexican tourists not to visit the other country and hurt the economies of both countries with the loss of their spending. ___
Buzz Feed
39 minutes ago
- Buzz Feed
46 Pictures That Sum Up Living In The US Right Now
I feel so bad for kids nowadays. I mean, I'm not surprised they feel this way. Jesus. We live in the Bad Place. Oh, cool, this doesn't sound dystopian at all! As if Palantir wasn't a scary enough company without reminding you that it's watching with this massive ad. ...Yeah, not really feeling like this is a r/MadeMeSmile situation. It should not have cost $41k to begin with. And it should not take two decades to pay off student loans. We shouldn't have to donate plasma from our bodies to afford books for school. College already costs an arm and a leg, and then they charge prices like this just to access course materials. This is not the heartwarming story it's framed as. Neither is this. One of the things I hate most about Trumpism is that he's given every misogynistic, xenophobic, racist asshole permission to be a massive misogynistic, xenophobic, racist asshole in public. I heard this ad recently in a taxi. For reference, over 90% of NYC taxi drivers were born outside the US, as of 2020. "No one wants to work anymore" for a reason, it seems. want to work. But they're not even getting past the door. Remind me again why people who work part-time (who, btw, are also probably working another job or in school), can't have time off? The fact that police violence is so bad that this needs to exist is pretty damning. Can AI help make the world a better place? Maybe one day. But so far, AI is giving a ton of inaccurate info, creating dangerous situations, and spewing stuff like this. Remind me who said Trump would pay for these tariffs? I feel like there's an easier way to protect kids from death via gunshot wound ( gun laws?), but okay. This is the state of American healthcare. As is this. Imagine denying someone a CANE. In case you need a more damning indictment of American healthcare, here ya go. We wouldn't need to have cards to remind ICE and law enforcement agents of our rights if they weren't trying to violate those rights. This is concerning as hell. "I never thought Leopards would eat MY face!!!!" And yet this is what rural states voted for. The fact that this question is even being landlords deserve jail time. Oh man, we are so, so cooked. Sounds about right for America. Cool, glad investors can benefit from this. Well, as long as the investors are good! Is this legal? Why are younger people paid less for the same work? This is where we're at now. This is why people can't buy homes. What happens when we all get priced out of any housing at all? Yep, that pretty much sums it up. The whole internet's full of paywalls. Since most people get their news from the all pretty much screwed. Remember when we fought a war so that we wouldn't have a king? Look how far we've fallen. This is horrifying. What in the propaganda...? Sorry, how is this different from the bus, and why is it more expensive? suspicious. And Brother is watching, y'all.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
63 percent disapprove of Trump administration handling of Epstein files: Poll
More than 6 in 10 voters in a new poll (63 percent) disapprove of how the Trump administration handled its investigation into convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Just 17 percent of voters surveyed in the Quinnipiac University national poll released Wednesday said they were satisfied with the Department of Justice's (DOJ) conclusions that Epstein kept no client list and died by suicide while awaiting trial on sex trafficking charges in 2019. Twenty percent had no opinion. Republicans, who have long fueled conspiracies about Epstein's associates and his death, were split — the poll found 40 percent approved of how the Trump administration carried out the probe, 36 percent disapproved and 24 percent had no opinion. Meanwhile, Democrats and independents overwhelmingly said they disapproved, at 83 percent and 71 percent, respectively. 'Epstein has been dead and gone for years but his tawdry legacy looms large in a country wanting to know more about who he knew and whether secrets have been buried with him,' Quinnipiac polling analyst Tim Malloy said in a statement. President Trump on Wednesday blasted supporters who have pushed for more information about Epstein's case after the FBI and DOJ revealed that their probe had ended with no new conclusions. 'Some stupid Republicans and foolish Republicans fall into the net, and so they try and do the Democrats' work,' Trump told reporters Wednesday. 'I call it the Epstein hoax. Takes a lot of time and effort. 'Instead of talking about the great achievements we've had … they're wasting their time with a guy who obviously had some very serious problems, who died three, four years ago,' he added. Additionally, 62 percent of voters surveyed in the new Quinnipiac poll said they had been 'somewhat' or 'closely' following news about the Epstein case. Quinnipiac surveyed 1,290 registered voters across the country July 10-14. The poll has a 2.7-point margin of error. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
