Indirect US–Iran talks mediated by Oman ended with both sides describing the opening round as constructive, while signalling major gaps over uranium enrichment, missile capabilities and regional security.
The talks, held in Muscat on Friday 6 February, were conducted indirectly, with Oman’s foreign minister, Badr Albusaidi, shuttling between delegations in separate rooms. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the exchange was “a good start” and that the parties had agreed to continue discussions, while President Donald Trump said the talks were “very good” and indicated further negotiations would follow.
The format underscored the political constraints on both sides. Tehran has insisted it will not hold face-to-face talks under threat, while Washington has framed diplomacy as one element of a broader pressure campaign that includes sanctions and an increased military presence in the region.
Trump told reporters that Iran “wants to make a deal”, adding that he believed time remained for negotiations, while repeating his long-stated position that any outcome must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Iran’s leadership, for its part, has argued that the talks should focus strictly on the nuclear file, and has rejected efforts to widen the agenda to include missiles, regional allies and domestic politics.
Araghchi’s public remarks reinforced that line. In comments reported after the Muscat round, he reiterated that Tehran would not negotiate its missile programme and said any US attack would be met by strikes on American bases in the region. He stressed that Iran’s retaliation would be directed at US facilities rather than host countries, an apparent attempt to limit diplomatic fallout with Gulf states that host US forces.
The talks take place against the backdrop of last year’s direct conflict involving Israel, Iran and the United States. Reuters reported in June 2025 that Iran fired missiles at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar after US strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, in an escalation that raised fears of a wider regional war.
This recent history has shaped negotiating positions. Tehran has argued that sanctions relief and recognition of a right to uranium enrichment for civilian purposes are central to any agreement. Washington has pushed for stringent limits on enrichment and stronger verification, while also seeking constraints on longer-range missiles and Iran’s support for armed groups across the region.
One of the most closely watched aspects of the Muscat meeting was the composition of the US delegation. Multiple reports said Trump’s envoy Steve Witkoff attended alongside Jared Kushner, the President’s son-in-law, and Adm Brad Cooper, commander of US Central Command. The inclusion of the region’s top US military commander was widely interpreted as an attempt to underline that negotiations are occurring alongside a credible military option.
The military context has been emphasised in reporting on US deployments. Photographs and accounts from the meeting referred to the aircraft carrier USS Abraham Lincoln operating in waters near Iran, while Reuters described heightened tensions tied to a US naval build-up and Trump’s threats aimed at forcing Tehran to curb enrichment and other programmes.
Within hours of the talks, Washington announced a new tranche of sanctions aimed at Iran’s oil exports. The US State Department said it had designated 15 entities and identified 14 vessels as blocked property linked to what it described as Iran’s “shadow fleet”, used to move petroleum and petrochemicals in circumvention of restrictions. The measures were presented as part of an enforcement push designed to constrain revenues that Washington says fund destabilising activity.
The timing of the sanctions announcement reinforced Tehran’s long-running contention that the United States uses negotiations to intensify economic pressure. Iranian officials have repeatedly argued that meaningful progress requires sanctions relief, while US officials have insisted that enforcement will continue absent concrete steps by Iran on enrichment and verification.
Oman, which has previously served as a discreet channel between Washington and Tehran, again positioned itself as a mediator capable of hosting talks without either side appearing to concede politically at home. Reporting on the Muscat round described the discussions as largely devoted to setting the scope and process for future negotiations, rather than resolving substantive disputes in a single sitting.
The next round is expected within days. Whether it produces movement will depend on whether the sides can bridge their core differences: Iran’s insistence on retaining an enrichment capability and excluding missiles from the agenda; the US demand for constraints robust enough to address “breakout” concerns; and the extent to which verification and monitoring can be agreed in a way that satisfies Washington while remaining acceptable to Tehran.
