US and Iran Set for Further Talks in Oman Amid Trump’s Military Threats – Live



Diplomatic efforts between the United States and Iran are unfolding in Muscat, Oman, in a renewed bid to defuse one of the world’s most dangerous geopolitical flashpoints. High-stakes negotiations, mediated by the Sultanate of Oman, are taking place against the backdrop of President Donald Trump’s repeated threats of military action — including warnings of strikes on Iranian targets if talks fail to yield results.

These talks represent the latest chapter in a long and troubled relationship between Tehran and Washington, one shaped by decades of rivalry, sanctions, nuclear standoffs, proxy conflict, and intermittent diplomacy.

---

Why Oman? Geopolitical Middle Ground

Oman has long played a unique role in fostering dialogue between adversaries in the Middle East. Its neutral diplomatic posture and historical ties with both Iran and Western nations make it a preferred venue for indirect and direct negotiations.

Previous rounds of talks in Oman — alongside other diplomatic efforts — have focused primarily on Iran’s nuclear program, though Washington seeks to expand the dialogue to include Iran’s ballistic missile arsenal, regional influence, and ties to militant groups.

Despite this, Tehran has insisted that nuclear issues alone should be on the agenda, rejecting U.S. demands to broaden the scope of discussions.

---

Tensions Escalate as Military Posturing Grows

The diplomacy arrives amid one of the tensest periods in recent U.S.–Iran relations.

President Trump has publicly warned of military action should talks collapse, and American forces — including naval carriers and air assets — have been deployed to the region in greater numbers, signaling readiness for confrontation even as negotiators meet.

Iran, meanwhile, has vowed to defend itself against perceived U.S. “adventurism,” with senior officials making bold statements about resisting excessive demands.

Just a day before negotiations began, Iranian military forces seized two foreign oil tankers in the Persian Gulf, escalating tensions further and underscoring how volatile the situation remains.

---

Core Issues on the Table

1. The Nuclear Program

Iran’s nuclear activities sit at the center of the talks. Tehran claims its program is for peaceful civilian use, while Washington and its allies remain suspicious of possible weaponization.

In previous rounds, Iran suggested potential compromises — such as lowering enrichment levels or participating in multilateral oversight — but has steadfastly refused to accept permanent curbs without sanctions relief and economic incentives.

2. Missile and Defense Systems

The United States is pushing to include Iran’s ballistic missile program in broader negotiations, arguing regional security hinges on limiting Tehran’s long-range strike capacity. Iran, however, has labeled its missile defenses a sovereign right and a necessary deterrent.

3. Regional Power Dynamics

Another layer is Iran’s influence in the Middle East — through allied militias and political proxies in countries like Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. The U.S. believes these networks contribute to instability, while Iran says they are strategic buffers against aggression.

Though ancillary to nuclear talks, regional influence remains a persistent underlying concern between the parties.

---

Domestic Pressures and Global Watch

Within Iran, public unrest — driven by economic hardship and political repression — has intensified internal pressure on the government. Sanctions have squeezed the economy, and national currency depreciation has fueled discontent.

Internationally, allies and rival states alike are watching closely. Iraq’s foreign minister publicly endorsed negotiations, describing them as necessary for regional stability.

Oil markets have also reacted: crude prices fell ahead of the talks as hopes for de-escalation grew, but analysts warn that volatility will persist as long as uncertainty looms.

---

Diplomacy Under the Shadow of Threats

What sets these talks apart is the constant juxtaposition of dialogue and deterrence. President Trump has repeatedly used military rhetoric — including blunt warnings directed at Iran’s Supreme Leader — even while claiming a willingness to pursue negotiation.

This dual strategy places negotiators in a delicate position: they must balance diplomatic progress without appearing weak, all while avoiding missteps that could spiral into open conflict. Analysts caution that maximum demands — such as tying nuclear, missile, and regional issues into a single bargain — risk overwhelming an already fragile dialogue.

For Tehran, the distrust of U.S. intentions runs deep. Even as Iranian delegates arrive at the negotiating table, they do so with clear warnings about defending national interests, projecting strength despite diplomatic overtures.

---

Can Talks Yield Results?

Whether these negotiations produce tangible outcomes or simply delay confrontation remains uncertain. On one hand, Oman’s mediation and continued dialogue demonstrate that both powers perceive negotiation as preferable to unchecked escalation.

On the other, longstanding mistrust, competing agendas, and the heavy presence of military threats create an atmosphere where miscalculation could quickly undo diplomatic progress.

One truth stands clear: the world is watching, and the stakes could not be higher — not only for Washington and Tehran but for regional security and global markets.