U.S. and Iran: Nuclear Standoff, Historic Enmity, and the Middle East’s Political Arena

 U.S. and Iran: Nuclear Standoff, Historic Enmity, and the Middle East’s Political Arena

Talks in Oman: A Diplomatic Breakthrough or the Brink of War?

Dr. Asif Nawaz

Assistant Professor

Hamdard Institute of International Studies, Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi

draasifnawaz@gmail.com

+91 9013228794

On April 8, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump announced that a pivotal "high-level meeting" concerning Iran’s nuclear program is slated for Saturday, April 12, in Oman. The U.S. administration has labelled it an "indirect meeting," while Iran refers to it as "indirect negotiations" facilitated by Omani mediation (U.S. Department of State). In a stern warning issued on Monday, Trump declared, "I think if the talks aren't successful with Iran, I think Iran is going to be in great danger. And I hate to say, great danger, because they can't have a nuclear weapon" (qtd. in "Trump Warns Iran"). This statement comes at a time when the Middle East is already on edge, with Israel’s relentless offensive in Gaza showing no signs of abating and tensions between Iran and Israel reaching a boiling point (Al Jazeera).

Trump, who has long styled himself as a master "deal-maker," is determined to secure a new deal to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. Meanwhile, Iran—burdened by over two decades of crippling economic sanctions and facing growing strategic vulnerabilities—is seeking a way out of its isolation while striving to avoid a military confrontation with global powers. The political tug-of-war between these two nations is not merely a recent development sparked by Iran’s nuclear ambitions. It is a complex saga rooted in decades of hostility, the geopolitical upheaval following the Arab Spring, and a web of competing strategic interests in the Middle East.

The Roots of Bitterness: A Historical Divide

The rancour between the United States and Iran traces back to a defining moment in 1953, when the CIA, in collaboration with British intelligence, orchestrated the overthrow of Iran’s democratically elected Prime Minister, Mohammad Mossadegh (1882–1967) (Gasiorowski 67). Mossadegh had become a threat to Western interests in the region after nationalizing Iran’s oil industry in 1951 (Abrahamian 268). This intervention reinstated the autocratic rule of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (1919–1980), a staunch Western ally who governed Iran with an iron fist to safeguard the interests of foreign oil companies (Kinzer 89). The coup ignited a deep and enduring resentment among Iranians, who viewed it as a direct assault on their sovereignty. Far from a fleeting political reaction, this bitterness evolved into a national consciousness that continues to shape Iran’s political narrative today (Milani 34). Under the Shah’s regime, economic disparities and social injustices soared, sowing the seeds for the 1979 Islamic Revolution (Keddie 145). The 1953 coup thus stands as the cornerstone of U.S.-Iran enmity, providing critical historical context for understanding today’s nuclear standoff and diplomatic frictions.

The 1979 Islamic Revolution marked a dramatic escalation in this hostility. Led by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, the Iranian people toppled the Shah’s allegedly tyrannical regime, establishing an Islamic Republic and emphatically rejecting Western domination (Arjomand 112). During the revolution, Iranian students seized the U.S. Embassy in Tehran, holding 52 American diplomats hostage for 444 days in what became known as the "Hostage Crisis" (Bowden 23). This episode inflicted irreparable damage on bilateral relations. For the United States, it was a humiliating blow to its global prestige; for Iran, it was a bold declaration of autonomy against Western influence (Houghton 78). The crisis fuelled intense anger among American policymakers and the public, shaping Washington’s Iran policy for decades. In Iran, it is still celebrated as a monumental revolutionary triumph, commemorated annually with fervour on the 22nd of Bahman (February 11) in the Iranian calendar (Moin 201). Yet, the hostage crisis demolished any semblance of trust between the two nations, a legacy that lingers in their interactions today. The fact that both sides are now meeting in a neutral third country like Oman underscores this profound historical mistrust, highlighting the delicate and intricate nature of diplomacy between them (Fisher).

The Iran-Iraq War of the 1980s further fanned the flames of this animosity. When Saddam Hussein invaded Iran in 1980, the U.S. openly backed Iraq, supplying weapons, financial aid, and intelligence, viewing Iran’s Islamic Revolution as a regional threat (Hiro 98). The eight-year conflict plunged Iran into bloodshed and devastation, claiming countless lives. This American support deepened Iran’s wounds, reinforcing the perception that the U.S. would stop at nothing to undermine it (Pollack 153). A particularly egregious incident occurred in 1988 when the U.S. Navy warship USS Vincennes shot down an Iranian commercial airline plane, killing all 290 aboard (Fisher). Washington called it a "mistake," but Iran deemed it a deliberate act of aggression, cementing its view of the U.S. as a hostile power (Ansari 67). From then on, Iran branded America the "Great Satan," while the U.S. accused Iran of "sponsoring terrorism," pushing it toward global isolation (U.S. Department of State). Over the past two decades, this enmity has taken on new dimensions, complicating their relationship further.

Post-9/11 Tensions and the Nuclear Escalation

After the September 11, 2001, attacks, as the U.S. launched its "War on Terror," Iran initially offered cooperation in Afghanistan (Parsi 145). However, in 2002, President George W. Bush labelled Iran part of an "Axis of Evil," rejecting its overtures (Bush). The 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq opened a new front on Iran’s doorstep, which Tehran perceived as a direct threat, prompting it to accelerate its nuclear program as a means of self-defence and sovereignty (Cordesman 78). The U.S. and its allies accused Iran of supporting terrorism and pursuing nuclear ambitions, while Iran condemned American sanctions and military pressure as assaults on its economy (Takeyh 102). During this period, Iran expanded its regional influence through proxies like Hezbollah and Hamas, a move that Israel and Saudi Arabia found intolerable (Norton 89).

The 2011 Arab Spring shook the Middle East, reshaping its political landscape. Iran seized the opportunity to bolster its role—supporting Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria, aiding Houthi rebels in Yemen, and strengthening Hezbollah in Lebanon—establishing itself as a formidable regional player (Phillips 134). While Tunisia and Egypt saw the fall of dictatorships, the Syrian civil war pitted Iran against the U.S., with Tehran backing Assad and Washington supporting rebel factions (Hokayem 56). Amid rising global concern over Iran’s nuclear program, President Barack Obama prioritized diplomacy, culminating in the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) (U.S. Department of State). The deal capped Iran’s uranium enrichment at 3.67%, reduced its stockpile, and granted international inspectors access, offering sanctions relief in return (IAEA 12). However, Israel and Saudi Arabia criticized it as inadequate, arguing it failed to address Iran’s ballistic missiles and proxy networks (Netanyahu).

In 2016, Donald Trump took office, denouncing the JCPOA as "the worst deal ever" and withdrawing from it on May 8, 2018. Adopting a "maximum pressure" strategy, his administration imposed crippling sanctions that devastated Iran’s economy, nearly halting its oil exports and pushing it to ramp up its nuclear activities (Zarif). By 2019, Iran abandoned JCPOA limits, enriching uranium to 60% by 2021—a level just shy of weapons-grade (IAEA 18). The 2020 U.S. drone strike that killed General Qassem Soleimani brought the two nations to the brink of war, with Iran retaliating by firing missiles at U.S. bases in Iraq, though a larger conflict was narrowly averted. Trump’s policy failed to deter Iran’s nuclear progress. The subsequent Biden administration attempted to revive the JCPOA in 2021–2022, but Iran’s rigid demands and ongoing U.S. sanctions derailed negotiations (Blinken). Iran intensified pressure on Israel and Saudi Arabia through its proxies while deepening ties with Russia and China.

These developments have heightened global tensions, pushing U.S.-Iran animosity to unprecedented levels. Yet, the roots of this hostility lie in the historical events of 1953 and 1979 (Kinzer 15). Today, in 2025, with Trump back in power and Iran’s nuclear program once again in the spotlight, relations are spiralling further downward. The shadow of the past looms large, clouding diplomatic prospects and amplifying the risk of military confrontation, leaving the region’s future shrouded in uncertainty.

The Current Standoff: Oman Talks in Focus

In 2025, Donald Trump, now in the fourth month of his second term, has begun fulfilling his campaign promises, turning his attention to Iran’s nuclear program with a resolve to solve this longstanding issue once and for all (White House). Tomorrow, April 12, both nations are set to engage in talks in Oman. Current estimates suggest Iran’s "breakout time"—the duration needed to produce weapons-grade uranium (90% enriched) for a nuclear bomb—has shrunk to mere weeks, a stark contrast to the 12 months afforded by the JCPOA (IAEA 25). This shift stems from Iran’s growing stockpile of 60% enriched uranium and its use of advanced centrifuges like the IR-6 and IR-9, which accelerate the enrichment process (Pollack 189). While civilian nuclear power requires only 3–5% enriched uranium, weapons-grade material demands 90%, and Iran’s current stockpile is perilously close to that threshold (Cirincione 67).

Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, who will represent Tehran in Oman, expressed determination in an April 8 op-ed in The Washington Post: "Iran is ready to engage in earnest and with a view to seal a deal. We will meet in Oman on Saturday for indirect negotiations. It is as much an opportunity as it is a test" (Araghchi). The Trump administration, however, has offered mixed signals about the talks’ nature. State Department spokesperson Tommy Bruce told reporters last Tuesday, "This isn’t formal ‘negotiations’—it’s a ‘meeting.’ It’s informal, aimed at establishing initial contact," describing it as "touching base" (qtd. in "U.S. Signals Caution"). Despite these caveats, both parties appear genuinely eager to reach an agreement, lending the meeting significant weight.

Urgency and the Geopolitical Chessboard

Iran’s nuclear advancements have thrust global politics into a precarious state, with time running out and the Middle East’s future hanging in the balance. Gregory Brew, a senior analyst at Eurasia Group and Iran expert, notes that Trump seeks a swift resolution to shift focus to broader Middle East goals: normalizing Israel-Saudi ties, strengthening economic partnerships with Gulf states, and crafting a long-term strategy to protect U.S. interests. "The Trump administration wants to box up Iran’s nuclear program and close the lid for good, clearing the path for regional stability projects," Brew says. This urgency is heightened by Iran’s advanced nuclear capabilities and a looming deadline: the U.N.’s "snapback mechanism" for reimposing sanctions, set to expire in October 2025, risks losing its leverage if no deal is struck (United Nations 14).

Israel, viewing Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat, advocates for a "Libya model," where Iran would dismantle its program entirely, as Muammar Gaddafi did in 2003 (Cordesman 102). Iran has flatly rejected this, wary of Gaddafi’s fate—overthrown with U.S. support years later—and seeing its nuclear program as a shield against regional powers like Israel and Saudi Arabia (Takeyh 134). The Middle East’s geopolitical landscape resembles a high-stakes chessboard, with Iran’s "Axis of Resistance"—including Hezbollah and Yemen’s Houthis—posing a persistent challenge to Israel and Saudi Arabia (Norton 112). Meanwhile, U.S. allies—Israel, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE—form a united front to curb Iran’s influence, with Saudi Arabia determined to maintain its dominance in the Gulf and protect global oil markets (Al-Rasheed 89).

Russia and China, Iran’s strategic partners, add further complexity. Until recently, Russia collaborated with Iran in Syria, while China props up Tehran with oil purchases and Belt and Road investments, offering a counterweight to U.S. pressure (Kaplan 156). Should Iran near nuclear capability, it could tip the region’s power balance, potentially sparking a nuclear arms race among Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states (Pollack 201).

What’s at Stake?

The U.S.-Iran standoff has reached a critical juncture, with the stakes encompassing not just bilateral ties but Middle Eastern security, global power dynamics, and the international economy. Trump has warned Iran of "the worst bombardment ever" if diplomacy fails, with Israel poised to lead the charge (qtd. in "Trump Warns Iran"). Iran wishes to avoid war, but its faltering proxies and domestic woes may push it toward nuclear weapons as a last resort (Ansari 89). The Gaza conflict and Iran-Israel skirmishes have turned the region into a tinderbox (Al Jazeera). A war could engulf Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and U.S. bases, with Iran potentially closing the Strait of Hormuz—through which 20% of the world’s oil flows—triggering a global economic crisis (EIA 23). Experts warn that a nuclear Iran could ignite a regional arms race, with dire consequences felt worldwide (Cirincione 78).

Diplomacy or Disaster?

This decades-long saga now teeters on a knife’s edge. The JCPOA’s collapse, Trump’s pressure tactics, and Iran’s nuclear strides have brought both sides to Oman’s table (Zarif). Failure here could plunge the Middle East into war, with profound repercussions for global economies and politics. "A nuclear Iran would not only threaten Israel but could set off a domino effect across the region," warns nuclear expert Joseph Cirincione (78). Will this be diplomacy’s triumph or the prelude to catastrophe? Only time will tell, but the world watches as this historic moment unfolds .

Works Cited

-      Abrahamian, Ervand. Iran Between Two Revolutions. Princeton UP, 1982.

-      Al Jazeera. "Israel Intensifies Gaza Offensive Amid Rising Tensions." Al Jazeera, 10 Apr. 2025, www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/4/10/israel-gaza-offensive.

-      Al-Rasheed, Madawi. A History of Saudi Arabia. Cambridge UP, 2010.

-      Ansari, Ali M. Confronting Iran: The Failure of American Foreign Policy. Hurst, 2006.

-      Araghchi, Seyed Abbas. "Iran’s Path to a Nuclear Deal." The Washington Post, 8 Apr. 2025, www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2025/04/08/iran-nuclear-deal-oman-talks.

-      Arjomand, Said Amir. The Turban for the Crown: The Islamic Revolution in Iran. Oxford UP, 1988.

-      Blinken, Antony. "Statement on JCPOA Negotiations." U.S. Department of State, 15 Mar. 2022, www.state.gov/statement-on-jcpoa-negotiations.

-      Bowden, Mark. Guests of the Ayatollah: The Iran Hostage Crisis. Grove Press, 2006.

-      Brew, Gregory. Iran’s Nuclear Ambitions in 2025. Eurasia Group, 2025.

-      Bush, George W. "State of the Union Address." The White House, 29 Jan. 2002, www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/01/20020129-11.html.

-      Cirincione, Joseph. Nuclear Nightmares: Securing the World Before It’s Too Late. Columbia UP, 2013.

-      Cordesman, Anthony H. Iran’s Military Forces and Warfighting Capabilities. CSIS Press, 2007.

-      EIA. "World Oil Transit Chokepoints." U.S. Energy Information Administration, 25 July 2023, www.eia.gov/international/analysis/special-topics/World_Oil_Transit_Chokepoints.

-      Fisher, Max. "The Forgotten History of U.S.-Iran Relations." The Atlantic, 15 July 2019, www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2019/07/us-iran-history/593875/.

-      Gasiorowski, Mark J. U.S. Foreign Policy and the Shah: Building a Client State in Iran. Cornell UP, 1991.

-      Hiro, Dilip. The Longest War: The Iran-Iraq Military Conflict. Routledge, 1991.

-      Hokayem, Emile. Syria’s Uprising and the Fracturing of the Levant. Routledge, 2013.

-      Houghton, David Patrick. U.S. Foreign Policy and the Iran Hostage Crisis. Cambridge UP, 2001.

-      IAEA. Verification and Monitoring in Iran: Report 2025. International Atomic Energy Agency, 2025.

-      Kaplan, Robert D. The Revenge of Geography. Random House, 2012.

-      Keddie, Nikki R. Modern Iran: Roots and Results of Revolution. Yale UP, 2003.

-      Kinzer, Stephen. All the Shah’s Men: An American Coup and the Roots of Middle East Terror. Wiley, 2003.

-      Milani, Abbas. The Shah. Palgrave Macmillan, 2011.

-      Moin, Baqer. Khomeini: Life of the Ayatollah. I.B. Tauris, 1999.

-      Netanyahu, Benjamin. "Speech on Iran Nuclear Deal." Israeli Prime Minister’s Office, 3 Mar. 2015, www.pmo.gov.il/en/MediaCenter/Speeches/Pages/speechcongress030315.aspx.

-      Norton, Augustus Richard. Hezbollah: A Short History. Princeton UP, 2007.

-      Parsi, Trita. Treacherous Alliance: The Secret Dealings of Israel, Iran, and the U.S. Yale UP, 2007.

-      Phillips, Christopher. The Battle for Syria: International Rivalry in the New Middle East. Yale UP, 2016.

-      Pollack, Kenneth M. The Persian Puzzle: The Conflict Between Iran and America. Random House, 2004.

-      Sanger, David E. The Perfect Weapon: War, Sabotage, and Fear in the Cyber Age. Crown, 2018.

-      Takeyh, Ray. Guardians of the Revolution: Iran and the World in the Age of the Ayatollahs. Oxford UP, 2009.

-      Trump, Donald J. "Remarks on Iran Nuclear Talks." The White House, 8 Apr. 2025, www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/remarks-iran-nuclear-talks-2025.

-      Trump, Donald J. The Art of the Deal. Random House, 1987.

-      "Trump Warns Iran Ahead of Oman Talks." CNN, 7 Apr. 2025, www.cnn.com/2025/04/07/politics/trump-iran-warning.

-      United Nations. "Security Council Resolution 2231: Snapback Mechanism." United Nations, 20 July 2015, www.un.org/securitycouncil/content/2231/snapback-mechanism.

-      U.S. Department of State. "Background Briefing on Iran Talks." U.S. Department of State, 8 Apr. 2025, www.state.gov/briefings/iran-talks-oman-2025.

-      "U.S. Signals Caution on Oman Meeting." Reuters, 8 Apr. 2025, www.reuters.com/world/us-signals-caution-iran-talks-2025-04-08.

-      White House. "President Trump’s Remarks on Iran Policy." The White House, 5 Apr. 2025, www.whitehouse.gov/briefings-statements/trump-iran-policy-2025.

-      Zarif, Mohammad Javad. "Iran’s Response to U.S. Sanctions." Foreign Affairs, 10 June 2019, www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/iran/2019-06-10/irans-response-us-sanctions.