Oman Hosts US-Iran Indirect Talks Amid Nuclear Demands, Regional Buildup

MUSCAT (Azat TV) – Indirect negotiations between the United States and Iran concluded initial rounds in Oman on February 6, 2026, as both nations grapple with heightened tensions and sharply divergent objectives regarding Iran’s nuclear program and broader regional security concerns. The talks, mediated by Omani officials, sought to de-escalate military threats and explore pathways for resuming diplomatic and technical dialogue.

US Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi led their respective delegations, with Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi facilitating the discussions. The second round of talks between the Iranian delegation and Oman’s Foreign Minister concluded around 11:20 GMT, with Witkoff subsequently holding consultations with his Omani counterpart, Iran’s Tasnim news agency reported. These discussions follow weeks of escalating rhetoric and a significant US military buildup in the Gulf, including the deployment of the USS Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier, which has contributed to widespread anxiety about a potential military confrontation.

Initial Rounds Conclude Amidst Persistent Disagreement

The core objective of the Muscat talks, as stated by Oman’s Foreign Ministry, was to ‘prepare the appropriate conditions for resuming diplomatic and technical negotiations.’ However, deep disagreements over the scope and ultimate goals of the discussions quickly became apparent. While Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson articulated Tehran’s aim to reach ‘a fair, mutually satisfactory, and honourable agreement regarding the nuclear issue,’ the Trump administration has been pushing for a broader agenda, seeking to include issues beyond Iran’s nuclear program, a stance Tehran has openly opposed.

A critical point of contention emerged from the White House, which reportedly seeks ‘zero nuclear capability’ from Iran, a demand Iranian Foreign Minister Araghchi countered by emphasizing Iran’s commitment to diplomacy with ‘open eyes and a steady memory of the past year,’ asserting the nation’s ‘rights’ on social media. This maximalist approach from the US side, as characterized by analysts speaking to Al Jazeera, complicates prospects for a swift resolution. An unnamed Iranian diplomatic source also warned against the presence of US Central Command (CENTCOM) officials in the talks, citing concerns that it could ‘jeopardise the process of indirect nuclear talks,’ Reuters reported, following earlier suggestions by the Wall Street Journal that CENTCOM chief Admiral Brad Cooper might join the US delegation.

Escalating Tensions Precede Omani Diplomacy

The current round of talks unfolds against a backdrop of severely strained relations and recent military actions. Months prior, in April and May 2025, the Trump administration held a series of nuclear talks with Iran, also in Oman. However, a planned June round was scuttled after Israel launched aerial strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities, an attack the US later joined. This direct military engagement marked a significant escalation, intensifying fears of a wider conflict in the region.

Adding to the pressure, US President Donald Trump announced in January that a ‘massive Armada’ was heading toward the region, prompting Iran’s foreign minister to declare that the country’s military had ‘their fingers on the trigger.’ These threats, coupled with tightened US sanctions and deadly anti-government protests spreading across Iran, where thousands of protesters and security forces members have been killed according to the U.S.-based Human Rights Activist News Agency, have created an extremely volatile environment. Despite these tensions, Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian instructed Araghchi last week to pursue ‘fair and equitable’ talks with Washington, signaling a willingness to engage diplomatically.

A Troubled History Shapes Current Impasse

The enduring mistrust between the United States and Iran is deeply rooted in a complex and often confrontational history. Relations have been non-existent since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, which saw Iranian students overrun the US embassy in Tehran, holding 52 Americans hostage for 444 days. This event followed decades of US involvement in Iran’s internal affairs, notably the 1953 CIA-backed coup that ousted Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammad Mosaddegh after he moved to nationalize the oil industry, restoring the Western-backed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi to power. For a period, the two nations were Cold War allies, even collaborating on civilian nuclear power under President Dwight D. Eisenhower’s ‘Atoms for Peace’ program.

However, the revolution fundamentally altered this dynamic, turning Iran away from the West and setting the stage for the current geopolitical standoff. This troubled past continues to inform current perceptions, with many Iranians expressing mixed feelings about the talks’ potential success. Tehran resident Soroush told Al Jazeera that he hopes negotiations can prevent war, which brings ‘fear and anxiety,’ and alleviate ‘economic pressure.’ Conversely, Masoud expressed skepticism, believing the parties are ‘only buying time,’ and that ‘military and political arrangements in the region suggests that a war may take place.’

International and Domestic Hopes for De-escalation

The international community is closely watching the developments in Oman. Russia, through the Kremlin, has expressed hope that the talks would yield results and lead to de-escalation, urging all sides to ‘show restraint.’ The economic impact of the tensions is also evident, with oil prices reportedly falling around 2 percent following the agreement to hold talks, easing concerns about Iranian crude supplies.

For the people of Iran, the stakes are profoundly personal. The prospect of war or continued economic hardship weighs heavily. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, in a statement on Thursday, differentiated between the Iranian regime and its people, stating that the ‘Iranian regime does not reflect the people of Iran, nor their culture rooted within a deep history.’ This sentiment underscores a broader international perspective that seeks to address the regime’s actions while acknowledging the civilian population’s plight.

The conclusion of initial indirect talks in Oman represents a critical, albeit tentative, step in managing the volatile US-Iran relationship, demonstrating a mutual, if reluctant, acknowledgment of the need for dialogue amidst profound distrust and escalating military postures. The stark divergence in stated objectives—the US pursuing ‘zero nuclear capability’ and Iran insisting on its rights within a nuclear agreement—underscores the immense challenges facing any genuine breakthrough, suggesting that while direct confrontation may be temporarily averted, a lasting resolution remains elusive.