Small window open for US-Iran talks, but swift end to war still unlikely

Tentative Steps in US-Iran Talks, Yet Rapid Conflict Resolution Seems Distant

US President Donald Trump’s bold assertion of “very strong talks” with Iran signaled optimism about diplomacy, claiming it could lead to “a complete and total resolution of our hostilities in the Middle East.” However, Iran swiftly dismissed this as a strategic maneuver, with no concrete evidence of negotiations having commenced. The progress described seems minimal, as the window for dialogue remains narrow and easily broken.

Trust between the nations has been fragile, shattered before by US-backed Israeli strikes. In February and June of last year, attacks on Iran’s infrastructure disrupted earlier hopes. Despite some preliminary exchanges between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US envoy Steve Witkoff, these talks are seen as mere preambles. Tehran now views Witkoff’s approach as a ruse, accusing the US of using diplomatic gestures to mask military intentions.

“The statements of the US president are part of efforts to reduce energy prices and buy time for the implementation of his military plans,” declared Iran’s foreign ministry.

Analysts note that Trump’s push for talks mirrors his strategy in Venezuela, where he sought to engage with an interim leader, Delcy Rodríguez. Iran’s current target is Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, a high-ranking official with deep ties to the country’s security apparatus. Ghalibaf, who has run for president four times and labeled protesters as “enemies and terrorists,” is now framed as a potential bridge between Iran’s military and political factions.

Despite indirect outreach to Ghalibaf, no official success has been confirmed. His alignment with hardline elements makes him a risky choice, especially after the assassination of Ali Larijani, a security chief who was a key negotiator. Larijani’s death has left Ghalibaf as the last remaining figure perceived as ideologically adaptable.

“He’s the last man standing who’s seen as more ideologically flexible,” said a source familiar with mediation efforts. “But even Trump said if he named him, they’d kill him, and then Israel immediately named him.”

Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, highlighted the challenges. “Neither side would meet at that level until the US and Iran are nearing a political breakthrough,” she explained. “Many negotiations are needed before reaching this stage.”

Meanwhile, Ghalibaf has emerged as a vocal critic on social media, dismissing Trump’s claims. “Our people demand the complete and humiliating punishment of the aggressors,” he wrote on X. “No negotiations with America have taken place.” With leaders on both sides entrenched in their positions, a direct meeting feels like a significant gamble. For now, diplomacy relies on backchannel communication and proposals from mediators, including nations like Pakistan, Egypt, and Turkey, which are stepping in to ease the deepening crisis.