Amid growing regional tension and international concern over Iran’s nuclear activities, indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States are set to begin tomorrow, April 12, in Oman. All signs point to a shift within the Iranian establishment, where even traditional hardliners appear aligned in support of the upcoming talks.
On Thursday, Ali Shamkhani, senior political advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader and former secretary of the Supreme National Security Council, posted on X that continued foreign threats and the possibility of military aggression against Iran could lead to the expulsion of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors. He added that Iran may also transfer enriched nuclear materials to undisclosed and secure locations within the country as a precautionary measure. Shamkhani’s statement came just 48 hours before the planned Oman talks, signaling Tehran’s readiness to significantly escalate if it perceives U.S. actions as hostile.
In response, U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce told BBC Persian that such threats are destabilizing and a serious miscalculation by Iran. She emphasized, “The threat to expel IAEA inspectors directly contradicts Iran’s repeated claims that its nuclear program is peaceful.” Bruce warned that accumulating highly enriched uranium, especially in secret, undermines Iran’s credibility and escalates global concerns. “Iran is the only non-nuclear state enriching uranium at such high levels without a peaceful justification,” she noted, adding that “these moves only heighten tensions and invite international isolation.”
Despite this tense backdrop, Iranian officials have described the Oman meeting as a “real opportunity” for diplomacy. Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran’s Foreign Ministry, said in a post on X that Iran is approaching the talks with goodwill and vigilance, and that “the U.S. should value this opportunity, which we are offering despite their hostile rhetoric.” He stressed that Iran will not pre-judge or predict the outcome, but instead will evaluate the seriousness of the other side before making further moves.
Shamkhani later confirmed that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will represent Iran in the talks and will attend with “full authority.” In another statement on X, Shamkhani said that Tehran is not interested in media spectacle but is seeking a real and fair agreement. He added that “important and implementable proposals are ready, and if Washington enters the talks with sincerity and political will, the path to an agreement will be clear and achievable.”
Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Deputy Foreign Minister for Political Affairs, also commented on the negotiations, saying that if the U.S. refrains from raising unrelated demands and abandons “threats and intimidation,” a path toward agreement is possible. He emphasized that the Islamic Republic believes in dialogue and engagement, but “bullying and coercion are entirely unacceptable.”
Hossein Shariatmadari, editor of the ultra-conservative Kayhan newspaper and a close ally of the Supreme Leader, has come out in cautious support of the talks. He stated that “no negotiations take place without the awareness and oversight of the Supreme Leader,” implying that this diplomatic move has top-level approval. Shariatmadari framed the negotiations as a strategic test of Washington’s intentions, and if they fail, it would be a calculated demonstration of American unreliability. He even noted that the format of indirect negotiations is, in itself, a form of humiliating the U.S., by denying it the legitimacy of direct dialogue.
Mohammad-Reza Nabavian, another prominent hardliner aligned with Shariatmadari, echoed this stance in sharp ideological terms: “Although the axis of global evil—that is, the wicked and terrorist U.S. regime—has called for direct negotiations with Iran, the nature of the talks (indirect), the subject (strictly nuclear), and the venue (Oman) have all been dictated by the great nation of Iran.” He added, “The bitter lesson of the JCPOA has proven that the U.S. never honors its own agreements.”
However, not all conservative voices are without caution. Ahmad Alamolhoda, the Supreme Leader’s representative in Khorasan Razavi Province and Friday prayer leader in Mashhad, warned of the potential dangers of the negotiations. He urged the Iranian negotiating team not to neglect their “religious and moral duty” and avoid placing the nation in a vulnerable position. Alamolhoda reminded the public that “America has never honored its international commitments,” pointing to the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA as an example. “Do we sit down and sign another deal with them again? This is what 70 years of experience with negotiations has taught us.” He concluded by saying that even if someone does not believe in the Islamic Republic or Islam, no proud Iranian would accept surrendering to U.S. pressure or giving up the country’s scientific and defensive capabilities.
Adding an international layer to the context, U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff arrived in St. Petersburg today, one day before the Iran-U.S. negotiations are set to begin. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov declined to confirm whether President Putin met with Witkoff. However, if such a meeting occurred, it would be their third encounter. Analysts believe Witkoff’s visit to a key Iranian ally like Russia may have implications for Saturday’s talks, either in coordination or pressure-building ahead of renewed diplomacy.
With nearly all factions in Tehran—including its most hardline voices—either supportive or cautiously observant, the upcoming negotiations mark a rare moment of political unity on the Iranian side. Whether this unity will translate into progress at the negotiating table depends largely on how each side navigates the balance between threats and diplomacy.