Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said in an op-ed published by The Washington Post on Tuesday that Iran was ready to reach a deal with the US on its nuclear program and said the “ball is now in America’s court.”
Araghchi and President Trump’s Middle East envoy, Steve Witkoff, will hold negotiations in Oman this Saturday. Trump claims that the negotiations will involve direct talks, while Araghchi insists that they will be indirect, meaning that mediators will pass messages to either side.
Aragchi said the recent engagement between the US and Iran through letters and indirect messages has represented a “genuine attempt to clarify positions and open a window toward diplomacy.”
He said Tehran was willing to reaffirm the pledge it made when the 2015 nuclear deal, known as the JCPOA, was signed, that “under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop or acquire any nuclear weapons.”
“Ten years after the JCPOA was concluded — and nearly seven years after the United States unilaterally walked away from it — there is no evidence that Iran has violated this commitment,” Aragchi wrote.
The Iranian diplomat noted that US Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard recently reaffirmed that there’s no evidence Iran is building a nuclear weapon. He said that there may be concerns over Iran’s nuclear program and that Tehran was willing to address them. “We are willing to clarify our peaceful intent and take the necessary measures to allay any possible concern,” he said.
Aragchi also said that Iran was ready to do business with US companies. “Many in Washington portray Iran as a closed country from an economic point of view. The truth is that we are open to welcoming businesses from around the world. It is the US administrations and congressional impediments, not Iran, that have kept American enterprises away from the trillion-dollar opportunity that access to our economy represent,” he said.
Aragchi warned against the recent military threats from Trump and the US military buildup in the Middle East, saying that it sends the signal that the US isn’t really interested in diplomacy. “Mark my words: Iran prefers diplomacy, but it knows how to defend itself. We have never yielded to threats in the past, and we will neither do so now nor in the future. We seek peace, but will never accept submission,” he said.
While Iran is open to diplomacy with the US, Reuters reported that Tehran is skeptical of the US’s intentions. One issue that Iran is concerned about is the fact that US officials have called for a deal that would not only restrict Tehran’s nuclear program but dismantle it altogether and limit its missile production and support for allies in the region.
“Trump wants a new deal: end Iran’s regional influence, dismantle its nuclear program, and halt its missile work. These are unacceptable to Tehran. Our nuclear program cannot be dismantled,” an Iranian official told Reuters. “Our defense is non-negotiable. How can Tehran disarm when Israel has nuclear warheads? Who protects us if Israel or others strike?”
Some hope upon the horizen…. If no one trips on such a fine line…!!!….
Iran is ready… but US is not… because they don't know how…!
Be careful of any deal Iran. The US nor Israel keep their promises. They have broken most deals in the past, starting with the US deals they made with Native Americans. And just recently with the cease fire deal with Hamas. They broke it big time and flaunt it as their right to break deals.
All strong nations only keep to deals as long as they continue to be beneficial for them and no longer …
Apr 9, 2025 US-Iran talks: Sanctions, nuclear threats or diplomacy — what brought arch enemies to the table?
Sanctions, nuclear posturing, and regional war drums — for years, the US and Iran seemed locked in a permanent standoff. So why are they suddenly talking? This video unpacks what really brought Iran to the negotiating table: a collapsing economy, pressure from allies like Russia and China, and the looming threat of military escalation. This is the full story behind Saturday’s high-stakes US-Iran talks in Oman.
https://youtu.be/whE2wgGXSH0?si=S9P5V3fwqyl_igqn
Iran has always been willing to talk to the US, but Brainwashington has not been willing to do so. Instead they make demands which they know will not be accepted and call that "negotiation". That bird don't fly.
Actually, Iran has not been willing. I have no idea where you came up with this. It is not true if you know history as I do.
Aug 9, 2016 Kill Russians, kill Iranians, scare Assad!
Ex CIA deputy Mike Morell – Aug 8 – Charlie Rose
https://youtu.be/UZK2FZGKAd0
This Morell seems like the typical sociopathic CIA National Narcissist goon. "Iran gave weapons to Iraqi Shia that killed Americans. "Well, hello, what were we DOING there? Invading the region under false pretenses, killing a million people, destabilizing the country next door to them. What would WE do if Russia had invaded Mexico, Canada, or indeed any country in the Americas? Especially if they made up a reason to do so, like we did in Iraq. We get mad if those countries even attempt to TRADE in our hemisphere. Have you read Republics of Myth? It's a scholarly, unbiased assessment of the history of our relations with Iran for the last 70 years or so. They have reasons not to trust us, and the book shows how the tensions between the two have enabled missed opportunities of both sides to mend fences. They did try to mend fences with us a couple of times (after 911 for one), but of course pressures from Neocons nipped that in the bud. For the Iranians, it's a trust issue. There's way more detail than that, so I highly recommend reading that book if you haven't.
Any and every CIA agent are all psychopath's!
Jan 13, 2020 A timeline of U.S.-Iran relations The U.S. and Iran have a complicated history dating back decades.
From the U.S. involvement in the shah's 1953 coup of Prime Minister Mohammed Mosaddegh, to the Iran hostage crisis in 1979, to the U.S. killing of one of Iran's top generals in January 2020, the U.S. and Iran's conservative religious and political leaders have often found themselves in stark opposition to one another about their visions for both Iran's own future and larger interests in the Middle East.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/a-timeline-of-u-s-iran-relations
https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2020/01/2020-01-08T070631Z_1880566359_RC2JBE917CLC_RTRMADP_3_IRAQ-SECURITY-1200×844.jpg
Iran is as willing to negotiate reasonably with the US as Russia and China are. The US though thinks that "negotiate" means "bow down and accept our every demand", which is not how the rest of the world understands that word.
Interesting that WaPo published it, especially the truth from Tulsi re the Intel assessments on irans not building nukes. Kind of takes the whole fake urgency point away …
It’s a good opportunity for Trump to show some independent initiative and get a big win. Can he sell it as such to his funders? That’s the key …
Interesting that Trump again did a Witkoff on Netanyahu (who was surprised) with sudden negotiations coming up this Saturday. Does this mean Trump is between several views on what to do, whether from Net/the neocons/the Pentagon and has sensed a new moment of glory is possible Saturday with a Witkoff “win” of some sort? This could mean a temporary lull in attacking Iran (changed later maybe as with the Gaza ceasefire) to ease up the pressure for the time being.
I've become less of a Scott Ritter fan lately but here (April 7) he is calm and reasonable (refers to “my friend Professor Marandi” with whom he has been arguing) and makes sense that Trump wants negotiation, not attack.