In the first round of negotiations between the Iranian regime and the United States in Oman, both sides left for their respective capitals without reaching a specific conclusion. However, the continuation of the talks was postponed to the upcoming Saturday.
Ali Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran’s regime, had previously described negotiations with the United States as unwise and illogical. However, under American pressure and threats, he agreed to participate in the talks. This round of negotiations has sparked various reactions within the regime.
Mohammad Reza Ahmadi Sangari, a member of the regime’s Majlis (parliament), said on Sunday, April 13: “I ask the negotiating team to consider the principles and fundamentals of the Islamic Revolution, and ensure that the interests of the Islamic Republic (Iran’s regime) regarding nuclear energy, missiles, and the resistance front are prioritized.”
The issue of the Iranian regime’s terrorist groups in the region has always been a point of contention. Western countries had previously turned a blind eye to the regime’s terrorist interventions in the region and elsewhere in the world, but this round of negotiations will address the matter. Earlier reports indicated that Hezbollah’s military bases had been evacuated from southern Lebanon ahead of the talks.
Esmail Kowsari, a member of the National Security Committee of the Majlis, referring to the Oman negotiations, said: “If the U.S. tries to bring up issues outside the nuclear topic, such as defense and missile matters, the talks will definitely be halted.”
According to a CNN report citing White House sources present in the negotiations, the Trump administration is eager to advance the talks swiftly. Steve Witkoff, the U.S. representative in the negotiations, aims to make a political decision to advance the agreement without delving into complex technical details that could slow down the process.
Abbas Goodarzi, the spokesperson for the regime’s Majlis presidium, said that if the U.S. chooses to speak from a position of force and threats, “it will certainly bring more harm to its own position.”
Goodarzi added: “Today, the Islamic Republic is capable of legitimately targeting any point of American interests.”
The spokesperson for the regime’s Majlis presidium concluded that if the other party in the negotiations tries to address the Iranian people with “threats and the language of force; if it makes even the slightest mistake, the response of the Islamic Republic will be equally crushing.”
The Javan newspaper, affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), also commented on the Oman negotiations, writing that the talks would benefit the regime under two scenarios.
The paper added: “A deadlock in negotiations would signify Iran’s resistance against U.S. bullying, while the continuation of the talks would mean American acceptance of the Islamic Republic’s terms.”
The Iranian regime has a long history of buying time and circumventing international sanctions, and this time it will likely attempt to use the same tactics to avoid the reactivation of the snapback mechanism.
Meanwhile, the regime faces a legitimacy crisis and the threat of nationwide uprisings within Iran. Regardless of the outcome of the negotiations, it is ultimately the people of Iran who will deliver the final verdict.
