US Shifts Iran Nuclear Talks to Bilateral Format Amid Strike Threats

GENEVA (Azat TV) – The United States and Iran have commenced a critical round of bilateral nuclear negotiations in Geneva, mediated by Oman, marking a significant shift in Washington’s diplomatic strategy. These direct talks, underway today, Tuesday, February 17, 2026, are unfolding under the looming shadow of a reported commitment from the Trump administration to back Israeli military strikes against Iran should diplomatic efforts falter. This development signals a new, high-pressure “Phase 2” in the U.S. approach to Iran’s nuclear program, diverging sharply from previous multilateral frameworks.

U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner arrived in Geneva to engage in indirect discussions with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi at Oman’s permanent mission. This follows an initial round of talks held just ten days prior in Muscat, described by both rival powers as a “good start” despite Washington’s recent strikes on Iranian nuclear sites in June 2025. The expedited nature of these negotiations underscores the urgency perceived by both sides to avert further military escalation in the region.

US ‘Phase 2’ Strategy: Bilateral Diplomacy and Military Backing

The current bilateral format, with Oman serving as the sole mediator, represents a notable departure from the multilateral negotiations that led to the 2015 Iran nuclear pact (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA), from which the U.S. unilaterally withdrew in 2018. This shift to direct engagement highlights a strategic pivot by the Trump administration, prioritizing focused talks over broader international consensus.

Central to this intensified approach is a report from CBS News, cited by The Times of Israel, indicating that U.S. President Donald Trump informed Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that Washington would support Israeli strikes on Iran if the current talks fail. Discussions regarding such an attack, roughly eight months after a 12-day Israel-Iran war in June 2025 where the U.S. joined Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, are reportedly ongoing. The potential American role in a future Israeli attack could involve midair refueling assistance or aiding Israel in securing overflight permissions from neighboring countries, many of whom have stated they would not allow their airspace to be used for an attack on Iran.

This explicit signaling of military backing underscores the heightened stakes of the Geneva talks. The U.S. has been preparing for a potentially more catastrophic scenario, dispatching another aircraft carrier to the Persian Gulf and reiterating threats of attack if Tehran does not agree to a deal. These developments follow Trump’s earlier threats to strike Iran over its crackdown on mass anti-regime protests in January 2026, which rights groups claim resulted in thousands of deaths.

Iranian Stance and US Demands

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who arrived in Geneva on Sunday night, has maintained a firm, yet flexible, stance. On social media platform X, Araghchi stated he was in Geneva with “real ideas to achieve a fair and equitable deal,” but unequivocally added, “What is not on the table: submission before threats.” He previously told the BBC that Iran was prepared to dilute its stockpile of highly enriched uranium in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, but ruled out renouncing its ballistic missile program.

Ahead of Tuesday’s negotiations, Araghchi met with Rafael Grossi, head of the UN’s nuclear watchdog, for “deep technical discussions” regarding Iran’s stockpiles. Iran has consistently denied seeking nuclear weapons, yet it has enriched uranium to levels with no peaceful application, obstructed international inspectors, and expanded its ballistic missile capabilities. The fate of Iran’s more than 400 kilograms of 60-percent enriched uranium, last seen by inspectors in June 2025, remains a critical point of contention.

The U.S. has laid out stringent demands, with Secretary of State Marco Rubio emphasizing two core requirements: all enriched material must leave Iran, and Iran must dismantle the equipment and infrastructure that enables enrichment. In an effort to sweeten the deal, Hamid Ghanbari, Iran’s foreign ministry deputy director for economic diplomacy, has floated proposals for an economic agreement that includes investments in oil, gas mining, and aircraft purchases, arguing that mutual economic benefits are essential for an agreement’s durability.

European Exclusion and Uncertain Outlook

Notably, European powers, including France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, appear to be largely excluded from these critical talks. French President Emmanuel Macron had previously advocated for Ukraine peace talks, which are also occurring in Geneva, to take place in the multilateral hub, perhaps hoping it would offer Europe greater access than the Gulf. Macron publicly stated at the Munich Security Conference that negotiations without Europeans “will not bring peace to the table.” European permanent missions in Geneva could not confirm any behind-the-scenes involvement in the current discussions, leaving their role unclear.

Despite the commencement of talks, skepticism remains high. Secretary of State Rubio expressed doubt over the weekend about securing a deal but affirmed that the U.S. was “going to try,” preferring a diplomatic resolution. However, the deeply entrenched red lines and boiling military tensions between the opposing parties suggest a challenging path ahead for these expedited negotiations.

The shift to bilateral talks, coupled with the explicit U.S. commitment to potentially back Israeli military action, fundamentally alters the dynamics of the Iran nuclear issue. This ‘Phase 2’ strategy suggests a more direct, high-stakes approach by Washington, putting immense pressure on Tehran to negotiate while simultaneously raising the risk of military confrontation if diplomacy fails to yield a breakthrough.