“There’s a very good chance we’re going to make a deal” with Tehran, US President Donald Trump told reporters amid hopes for a second round of talks between the United States and Iran aimed at ending the Middle East conflict.
Trump said Iran had agreed to “give us back the nuclear dust,” referring to enriched uranium stockpiles Washington says could be used for weapons, and claimed Tehran had offered not to possess nuclear weapons for more than 20 years. He added that Iran was willing to do things now that it had not been willing to do two months earlier, and that any successful negotiation would be announced soon. The next round of talks could take place at the weekend, he said, and an extension of a two-week ceasefire was possible but might not be needed if Tehran wanted a deal. Trump also suggested an agreement could push oil prices and inflation down.
Pakistani mediators, who have been facilitating the high-stakes negotiations, say backchannel diplomacy has made progress. A Pakistani source told Reuters that an upcoming meeting could produce a memorandum of understanding, followed by a comprehensive deal within 60 days, saying “both sides are agreeing in principle” and that technical details would follow.
In Iran, state media portray the government as united behind parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf and his negotiating team, framing talks as a “diplomacy of enhanced strength.” Ghalibaf has stressed the unity of the Islamic Republic with its “axis of resistance”—allied groups including Hezbollah, the Houthis and Hamas—saying they act as “one body” in war and ceasefire.
At the same time, skepticism is growing inside Iran. Many view the ceasefire as an opportunity for the US to increase military pressure, a perception reinforced by reports of additional US troop deployments. Iranian officials say they approach talks with “great caution” and that the military is prepared to meet threats. Deep mutual mistrust means an agreement would be difficult, not only over the nuclear program but also on contentious issues such as the Strait of Hormuz, international sanctions and Iran’s backing for regional proxies.
Experts offer a mixed assessment. Hamidreza Azizi of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs (SWP) said the first round of talks in Islamabad appeared to have failed, but that American and Iranian sources indicate some progress. He identified three crucial issues: the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s nuclear program and Tehran’s regional proxies. Conrad Schetter of the Bonn International Center for Conflict Studies said overall the impression is that the sides have not moved closer on key demands, but a recent easing of rhetoric has opened limited room to maneuver.
The nuclear program remains the core sticking point. The US is reportedly demanding that Iran remove enriched material from its territory. Iran is willing to reduce stockpiles, but only gradually and in exchange for firm guarantees it will not be attacked again. Schetter said another US military campaign to achieve those goals seems unlikely, but a compromise could be conceivable: a temporary waiver or arrangement lasting around 10 to 12 years might be viable.
The Strait of Hormuz is a second flashpoint. Iran sees control of the strait as strategic leverage; the West views it as vital for global trade. Experts warn that even isolated incidents there could trigger major conflict. Azizi warned that even with a deal the fundamental confrontation is likely to persist in a “gray zone” of indirect clashes and tensions.
Analyses from think tanks temper expectations for a quick or broad settlement. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy called fast or broad progress unrealistic, while Chatham House said any ceasefire would be a necessary step back from the brink.
Domestically, negotiations with the US are unlikely to bring political liberalization in Iran. Schetter argued the regime has proven its resilience under pressure; repression and wartime survival have strengthened its hold. That reduces hope for fundamental change among Iranians, who may conclude the regime is nearly impossible to overthrow and should not expect improvements in civil liberties in the short term.
This article was originally written in German.
