Despite stalled talks and a fragile ceasefire, President Trump expressed optimism this week that a permanent deal—possibly including Iran relinquishing its enriched uranium—is within reach. Experts who spent months negotiating the 2015 nuclear agreement say mutual mistrust and starkly different negotiating styles make a quick truce unlikely.
Wendy Sherman, the lead U.S. negotiator on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) finalized in 2015, said the administration’s recent approach was mistaken. “You cannot do a negotiation with Iran in one day,” she told NPR. “You can’t even do it in a week.” The JCPOA took roughly 18 months to achieve.
Rob Malley, also on the JCPOA team and later a special envoy to Iran, described the contrast in styles: “Trump is impulsive and temperamental; Iran’s leadership [is] stubborn and tenacious.” The 2015 talks, led by Secretary of State John Kerry and Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, ended after a marathon 19-day session in Vienna. Jon Finer, Kerry’s chief of staff, said Kerry’s patience was a major asset. Iranian negotiators would endure long lectures, repeatedly say no to probe priorities, and force negotiators to revisit issues many times over weeks or months to make progress.
Finer praised the Iranian team’s capability: they often lacked expert advisers just outside the room yet mastered technical details on nuclear matters and sanctions. They negotiated in English across hundreds of pages and detailed annexes.
Critics say Vice President Vance’s recent whirlwind trip to Islamabad signaled the U.S. lacks the patience such negotiations require. Sherman said the Trump administration entered with maximalist demands, essentially seeking Iran’s capitulation—something no nation will do.
Distrust runs deep. Iran was attacked twice in the past year—U.S. and Israeli strikes on nuclear sites while negotiations were ongoing, and later attacks at the start of the current conflict—leaving trust likely at an all-time low, Malley said. Iran must wonder how durable U.S. commitments are and will be reluctant to give up tangible assets like enriched uranium for promises that could be reversed. “Once they give up their stockpile… they can’t recapture it the next day,” Malley noted. Even in 2013–2015 the approach was “distrust but verify.”
Malley warned that the JCPOA’s lessons are limited now: the Tehran leadership that agreed to that deal is gone, its military capabilities diminished, and circumstances have changed dramatically, so past experience should be treated cautiously.
Mark Freeman of the Institute for Integrated Transitions said negotiations themselves have a leveling effect: the weaker party gains simply by entering the process. Each side seeks leverage—Iran has used measures like closing the Strait of Hormuz—while perceptions of who needs a deal more shape outcomes. If one side seems desperate for an agreement, that imbalance influences the entire negotiation.