Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US President Donald Trump's special envoy, Steve Witkoff, are expected to meet in Turkey for a decisive meeting whose outcome will directly affect the likelihood of war in the Middle East.
In a last-ditch effort to prevent escalation that could spiral into a regional conflict, and against the backdrop of heavy pressure from Turkey and Egypt to bridge the gaps between the sides, a meeting is scheduled for this coming Friday between Araghchi and Witkoff.
The talks come at an especially sensitive moment. The US military is close to completing an extensive deployment of forces around Iran, while unprecedented tension has prevailed between Washington and Tehran since the outbreak of the protest wave in Iran and its violent suppression by regime security forces.
The chances of success are far from clear. Much depends on whether the US administration opts for maximalist positions in the negotiations. That would mean demanding not only the complete dismantling of Iran's nuclear program, but also an end to its support for regional proxies and the imposition of significant limits on its missile program. Such demands would, in all likelihood, lead to the collapse of the talks. Alternatively, the administration could choose to focus solely on the nuclear issue, a move that could improve the prospects for progress.
Even such a narrowed scenario, however, offers no guarantee of a breakthrough. It is unclear what mandate the Iranian delegation has received, and whether Tehran, given its dire economic situation and the tangible threat of military confrontation with the US, will be willing to make concessions it has refused in the past, first and foremost halting uranium enrichment on its own territory.
While it may seem reasonable to assume that just as previous negotiations between Iran and the Trump administration failed, the current talks could also end in failure, there are significant differences between the two cases. Chief among them is the current state of Iran's nuclear program following the latest confrontation, and the fact that there is currently no active enrichment taking place in Iran.
Added to this is both sides' understanding of the heavy price of a breakdown in talks, as well as the intensive involvement of regional players, led by Qatar and Turkey, which wield real influence over both parties. This combination of factors could push Washington and Tehran toward limited understandings, despite the deep gaps and the fundamental lack of trust between them.
Even if a collapse of the talks does not necessitate an immediate US strike, expectations created by President Trump's public statements, together with the unprecedented military buildup in the Gulf region, could lead to US action in the near term. Conversely, if the sides demonstrate seriousness and a willingness to continue negotiations, it may be possible to postpone a military decision, at least to a certain point.
In the bottom line, even if the chances of success in the talks remain unclear due to the ambiguity surrounding both sides' positions, the cost of failure could drive them toward understandings that would delay, even if only temporarily, a US strike. The overriding goal of the regime in Tehran is to secure sanctions relief in exchange for the minimal concessions possible. Failing that, it seeks to drag out negotiations for as long as possible in order to postpone a military confrontation.
One way or another, decisive days lie ahead.
