Negotiations in Muscat… Calculations in Tel Aviv
It is an absurdity of Middle Eastern politics that many politicians and analysts are still betting on the complete elimination of Iran's role in the region. Even more absurd is the expectation that Israel will drag Washington into this "war of elimination."
True, this is the most right-wing US administration since the end of World War II, and no American administration has ever been as closely aligned with Israel as President Donald Trump.
It is also true that, since its founding in 1948, Israel has never been governed by a more fanatical, racist, and fascist government than that of Benjamin Netanyahu and his two 'transferist' partners, Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich.
It is just as true that the Iranian leadership never showed the kind of hostility to Arab "neighbors" that we are now seeing from the regime of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), which boasted about their control over four Arab capitals until very recently!
Nevertheless, we Arabs remain reluctant to wrap our heads around the realities underpinning Washington, Tel Aviv, and Tehran's approach to the region's existential political issues, including the question of whether Arabs will retain any presence or say in it in the foreseeable future.
On the other hand, those of us with strong memories still clearly recall the first 'secret' rounds of negotiations between the US and Iran under Democratic President Barack Obama... that culminated in the famous 2015 nuclear deal.
At the time, the talks were held behind closed doors in the Omani capital, Muscat, hidden from the eyes of the Arabs and the world. As for the new round of negotiations that began on Saturday (also in Muscat), they have been public and are being led by Republican President Donald Trump, the same man who suspended the deal in 2018, during his first term.
And while the American negotiating team may have changed, the same figures remain in power in Tehran and its negotiating team has not been altered; indeed, one of the most prominent negotiators, Abbas Araghchi, is now foreign minister.
The fact is that in the ten years between 'yesterday's agreement' and the current attempt to broker a new one, things have changed considerably on the ground.
Things have changed in the region's 'theater of operations.'
The region's violated, fragmented, and broken polities have been shaken, paving the way for new facts on the ground that facilitate Israel's 'transfer' plan. This plan is sponsored, promoted, and supported by Washington, which has sought to remove the obstacles that stood (or once stood) in the way of achieving it.
To begin with, the Palestinian cause has been pushed to the top of the 'taboo' list, as the world waits for investments to begin along the now depopulated shores of the Gaza Strip.
The 'transfer' plan is gaining regional momentum. To the north, in Lebanon, the Israeli war machine has clipped the wings of Iran's leverage. In Syria, the Assad regime collapsed after 54 years of double-dealing and double-speak, once it outlived its utility to most of its patrons and handlers.
To the east, in Jordan, the leadership has long been pressured to accept the 'alternative homeland' project, and the Trump administration, chose not to empathize with Jordan's chronic economic hardship, imposing some of the highest tariffs on the country of any in the Middle East as Trump announced his broader tariff wars against both adversaries and allies.
And to the west, we find the most populous Arab state, Egypt. It was targeted by Netanyahu's government early on, with pressure and blackmail to facilitate the displacement from Gaza. Neither the peace treaty with Israel, nor full normalization, nor the years Egypt has spent mediating between the parties to the conflict (despite the criticism from both domestic and international opponents) have spared it from such coercion.
Even in the Gulf region, where some countries have adapted to normalization, Netanyahu's government has shown no good faith, refusing to engage with any genuine regional peace deal founded on respect for UN resolutions and the proposals of Arab Summits.
What we are now seeing, as Washington and Tehran hold negotiations over the heads of the region's concerned and suffering nations, is the Israeli right's forward escape, its expansion of targets and mobilization.
With its military machine and security apparatus, this right-wing bloc continues to occupy positions in Lebanon and tamper with Syria's fragile domestic stability. It is now escalating its threats against Türkiye. Meanwhile, in Washington, the master of the White House is threatening to destroy and ruin Iran if it insists on moving forward with developing nuclear military capabilities.
Trump's threats undoubtedly amount to pressure that leaves the Iranian leadership in an awkward position both domestically and vis-a-vis the regional forces and non-state actors that are continuing to bet on it, in Iraq, Yemen... and even Lebanon.
Moreover, the US envoys currently managing this pressure campaign against Iran, such as Steve Witkoff and Morgan Ortagus, are considered part of the 'Israeli lobby' in the United States. They understand that Washington's objective with Iran, which essentially doesn't change, is to curb its ambitions, excesses, and blackmail, without necessarily leading to a decisive confrontation.
Accordingly, one could say that, thanks to Washington's unconditional support, Netanyahu has, for the time being, achieved his aim.
But the lingering question remains: Will he be content with the outcomes of this new round of negotiations with Tehran, or (as is his habit) will he choose to push his politics of blackmail and entrapment further?
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Saudi Gazette
25 minutes ago
- Saudi Gazette
Trump warns Iran of unmatched US military response amid Israel conflict
WASHINGTON — US President Donald Trump warned Iran on Sunday that any attack on American interests would be met with overwhelming force, amid escalating tensions between Israel and Iran. Posting on his Truth Social platform, Trump said: 'If we are attacked by Iran in any way, the full force of the American military will come down on you at levels never seen before.' Trump also noted the potential for an agreement between Iran and Israel to end the ongoing conflict but emphasized that the United States had no involvement in the Israeli military strikes that began Friday. His remarks came in response to repeated Iranian accusations that Washington played a role in Israel's strikes on nuclear and military targets across Iran, including the assassination of senior commanders and nine nuclear scientists. The Israeli government has acknowledged urging the US to support its military campaign, though Trump has not committed to direct involvement. Meanwhile, US officials have expressed concern over the potential for Iranian retaliation against American personnel or assets in the region, according to a report in The New York latest conflict erupted after Israel launched a series of strikes on multiple Iranian sites, including uranium enrichment facilities and military installations. In response, Iran fired hundreds of missiles and drones toward Israeli cities. — Agencies


Arab News
27 minutes ago
- Arab News
Cyprus says it has been asked by Iran to convey ‘some messages' to Israel
NICOSIA: Iran has asked Cyprus to convey 'some messages' to Israel, President Nikos Christodoulides said on Sunday, as the east Mediterranean island appealed for restraint in a rapidly escalating crisis in the Middle East. Christodoulides spoke to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday and he has also spoken to the leaders of Egypt, the United Arab Emirates and Greece, his office said. Earlier, Christodoulides told journalists Iran had asked Cyprus to convey 'some messages' to Israel but he did not say who specifically the messages were from or what they said. Cypriot officials offered no clarity on the nature of the messages, which came after the Cypriot foreign minister spoke to his Iranian counterpart on Friday night. Christodoulides also said he was not happy with what he said was a slow reaction by the European Union to the unfolding crisis in the Middle East. Cyprus, the EU member situated closest to the Middle East, had asked for an extraordinary meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council, he said. Projectiles sent by Iran to strike Israel were visible from various locations across Cyprus on Friday and Saturday night. 'It is not possible for the EU to claim a geopolitical role, to see all these developments and for there not to be at the very least a convening of the Council of Foreign Ministers,' Christodoulides told journalists. Cyprus has offered to assist in the evacuation of third-party nationals from the region, and has called on all sides to refrain from actions which could escalate the conflict.


Arab News
39 minutes ago
- Arab News
The regional implications of escalating Iran-Israel tensions
The new Israeli military strikes on Iranian targets did not catch many by surprise. Israel has been uncompromising in its enforcement of a zero uranium enrichment and even zero nuclear policy for Iran — an objective that lies at the core of its national security doctrine. Despite several rounds of US-Iran negotiations, including last month's fifth round that ended without progress, Iran has not conceded on this critical point. US President Donald Trump stated that he told Iran it should reach a deal within 60 days. Now, more than 60 days have passed without an agreement, largely due to Tehran's unwillingness to abandon its nuclear program, or at least scale back enrichment and accept stricter oversight. While Israel's actions were expected given its stated red lines, what has raised eyebrows is the apparent contradiction in the American position. The US administration has officially declared that it does not support further military escalation in the region. However, it is now clear that Washington was fully briefed in advance of the Israeli strike and the Israeli leadership was able to secure a green light and clear commitment of US support. This contradiction has prompted questions about whether America tacitly approved the operation, or even encouraged it, and participated in the deception plan that misled the Iranian calculation, despite public claims to the contrary. Iran has long boasted of its military strength and ability to deter threats and retaliate against them. The second key question, therefore, is how far is Iran prepared to go in escalating the confrontation and does it have the capability to sustain a high-intensity conflict? While Israel can continue targeting Iranian assets, doing so at scale requires American support in intelligence-sharing, resupply of munitions and diplomatic backing. Iran still has tools at its disposal. One of the more dangerous would be a return to asymmetric warfare and covert operations Dr. Abdulaziz Sager Iran still has tools at its disposal. One of the more dangerous would be a return to asymmetric warfare and covert operations, similar to tactics used in the 1980s, when Iranian-linked groups targeted US and Israeli interests across the region. This scenario is not hypothetical — it is one of the reasons Israel has temporarily closed embassies considered to be at risk of reprisal. There have been discussions about whether Russia could play a mediating role by taking custody of enriched uranium as a confidence-building measure. While Iran may see this as a way to retain its leverage, neither the US nor Israel is likely to support any arrangement that allows Tehran to preserve control over its sizable stockpile of highly enriched uranium, which it accumulated illegally over the past few years. The Arab Gulf states find themselves in a highly precarious position. Geographically and economically linked to Iran, they are deeply vulnerable to the fallout of escalating tensions. Their top priority is to avoid being dragged into the conflict, either as a battleground or as an indirect target of retaliation. A regional war would pose severe risks to the security of their territories and populations, critical infrastructure and economic prosperity. Thus, beyond the fundamental issue of security, there are also deep implications for economic prosperity and development. Gulf economies are fundamentally tied to stability, open trade routes and investor confidence, and any disruption, whether from attacks or threats to energy infrastructure, could have immense repercussions. The Gulf states have consistently upheld a policy of neutrality and noninterference, seeking to balance relations with Iran, Israel and the US. They have condemned Iran's involvement in Arab affairs and its ambitions of regional dominance, while also rejecting Israel's use of force and its disregard for international norms. Similarly, they oppose US policies that violate international law, particularly those that appear to enable further escalation. The Gulf's diplomatic stance is rooted in a principled call for respect for sovereignty, nonaggression and adherence to international law and human rights. With the conflict now transitioning into a broader military confrontation, the balance of power becomes the determining factor. In this respect, the Israeli-American alliance holds overwhelming superiority in terms of firepower, intelligence capabilities and strategic depth. Iran, under increasing pressure both domestically and externally, is showing signs of fatigue and attrition. This raises a third critical question: Will Iran's leadership come to terms with the realities of its disadvantage and move toward de-escalation? Or will it continue down a path that could lead to further destruction, isolation and internal collapse? In the coming weeks, the answer to the questions posed above will not only shape the future of Iran, they will also define the contours of regional stability. For the Gulf states, the imperative remains: stay out of the crossfire, safeguard national security and uphold the norms of international legitimacy that offer the only sustainable path out of this crisis. • Dr. Abdulaziz Sager is chairman of the Gulf Research Center.