Could US embassy handover crown successful talks?

“In my view, for a first session, it was a constructive meeting,” Araghchi said in remarks published by Iranian media after the talks.

“It was conducted in a calm and very respectful environment. No inappropriate language was used, and both parties demonstrated their intent to pursue these negotiations toward an agreement from an equal footing.”

The meeting, facilitated through shuttle diplomacy by Omani Foreign Minister Badr al-Busaidi, lasted about two and a half hours, he added.

Araghchi confirmed that Busaidi moved between the Iranian and American delegations four times to relay messages.

The Iranian official said that Tehran is not interested in drawn-out or symbolic dialogue. “We and the other side both believe in avoiding time-wasting negotiations. The US also indicated that it seeks a fair and timely agreement,” he added.

A second session is expected to be held next Saturday. Araghchi said while Oman will continue to host the process, the physical location may change.

The White House also described the exchange as a rare moment of diplomacy amid longstanding tensions.

US and Iranian officials held “very positive and constructive” talks in Muscat on Saturday, the White House said in a statement.

Special Presidential Envoy Steven Witkoff, accompanied by Ambassador Ana Escrogima, met Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in talks hosted by Oman’s foreign minister.

“Special Envoy Witkoff underscored to Dr. Araghchi that he had instructions from President Trump to resolve our two nations’ differences through dialogue and diplomacy, if that is possible. These issues are very complicated, and Special Envoy Witkoff’s direct communication today was a step forward in achieving a mutually beneficial outcome,” added the statement.

By publicly extending an olive branch to American investors, Iranian officials maybe testing Washington’s appetite for a broader détente—one that moves beyond nuclear containment toward economic normalization. Whether this message reflects a genuine shift or strategic posturing, and whether it leads to meaningful progress, will likely depend on what both sides are prepared to offer in talks that began in Oman on April 12.

However, a wide array of US sanctions, combined with deeply unfavorable conditions inside Iran, would make investment by the US—or any developed country—extremely difficult.

A bigger deal than 2015?

Recent comments by President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi suggest that Iran is seeking more than relief from secondary US sanctions—reimposed after Washington’s 2018 exit from the JCPOA—and is also pushing for the removal of primary sanctions that have long restricted American trade and investment in Iran.

In May 2018, President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew the United States from the JCPOA nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers and reimposed the secondary US sanctions that had been lifted under the deal. These sanctions aim to penalize any third parties breaking US restrictions on Iran.

Under current conditions, with both primary and secondary sanctions in place, no US company or individual is permitted to invest in Iran. Any such investment would only be possible after a nuclear agreement is reached and Iran begins implementing its commitments. Washington is unlikely to lift all sanctions upfront without Tehran first dismantling at least part of its uranium enrichment infrastructure and reducing or transferring its stockpile of highly enriched uranium.

What Iranian officials said about US investment

In October, President Pezeshkian said Iran needs at least $100 billion in foreign investment to reach an annual economic growth rate of eight percent. He emphasized that improving foreign relations is key to attracting such investment. Iran has averaged less than 3% annual growth throughout the 46 years of clerical government.

In a more pointed message this week, Pezeshkian said that Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has “no objection to American investors” entering the Iranian market. “Let them come and invest,” he said. “But we oppose plotting, regime change efforts, and destructive policies. Iran is not a place for conspiracies or espionage followed by assassinations. [All] investors are welcome to invest in our country.”

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reinforced this line in a Washington Post op-ed, arguing that the onus is on Washington to allow American companies to tap into what he described as a “trillion-dollar opportunity” in Iran, though he did not offer specifics.

While Khamenei has not commented on the talks or investment prospects, as Iran’s top decision-maker on foreign policy, he has authorized indirect negotiations with Washington and is expected to be closely involved in determining their scope and terms.

What type of US sanctions on Iran are in place?

After the 2015 nuclear deal the US lifted most of nuclear-related secondary sanctions. However, the primary US sanctions—which date back as far as the 1980s and ban nearly all trade and financial dealings between US persons and Iran—remained in force even after the deal.

These sanctions made it virtually impossible for American companies to invest in or trade with Iran, even during the brief JCPOA implementation period, unless they obtained special licenses from the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC).

For instance, Boeing was able to sign an agreement with Iran in 2016 to sell commercial aircraft after receiving a special OFAC license under the Obama administration. The company could not have even provided maintenance services without such an exemption under regulations like the Iranian Transactions Regulations (ITR).

Much to the dismay of Iran, Boeing’s aircraft were never delivered, and the license was revoked after the Trump administration exited the JCPOA.

Similar restrictions under the Export Administration Regulations (EAR), enforced by the US Commerce Department, also prevented non-US companies like Airbus from selling aircraft to Iran if they contained more than 10 percent US-origin components—unless licensed by OFAC.

Domestic impediments to investments

Beyond sanctions, one of the most significant barriers to American and broader international investment in Iran is the structure of its state-controlled economy. The system is riddled with opaque regulations, inconsistent enforcement, and non-transparent business practices. Key sectors are dominated by economic conglomerates affiliated with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), creating an uneven playing field and discouraging foreign entrants.

Iran’s economy is effectively closed, especially when it comes to consumer-facing industries. Even domestic investors face serious risks due to unclear rules, political interference, and limited legal protections. While foreign companies can occasionally secure contracts for state-backed infrastructure projects—such as revamping oil and gas facilities—these are tightly controlled by government-linked entities and offer little access to Iran’s broader market. This model does not allow for the kind of real, diversified investment that would benefit Iran’s private sector or broader population.

A nuclear agreement, while potentially reducing the immediate risk of conflict and unlocking limited economic engagement, is not enough to attract serious Western investment. For that to happen, Iran would need to implement deeper reforms. This includes recalibrating its foreign policy, scaling back the IRGC’s grip on the economy, and creating a more transparent and rules-based business environment. Without such changes, the prospect of meaningful, long-term foreign investment will remain remote.

Nour News, affiliated with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, published a series of articles on Saturday. In one analysis, the outlet warned that Trump would exploit any sign of weakness during the talks and advised Iranian negotiators to remain resolute.

“One effective strategy in dealing with Trump is to avoid giving in to his unreasonable demands,” the piece argued. “If he senses that the other side lacks the will to resist, he is likely to increase the pressure.” The outlet stressed that Iran must avoid making concessions.

Nour News also claimed that Trump’s foreign policy is not guided by US national interests but by his personal ambition to be feared and short-term tactical gains rooted in his self-interest.

In another article, the site said Trump’s team is divided between those open to negotiations and “warmongers” pushing for military confrontation. It claimed that Israel is using its influence to support the pro-war camp within Washington.

Kayhan, an ultra-hardline newspaper closely aligned with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s office, wrote in an editorial that Tehran should only engage in serious negotiations if all US sanctions are lifted.

The paper predicted that the talks would fail, asserting that Iran would emerge with another example to showcase America’s untrustworthiness to global public opinion. “From this perspective,” Kayhan wrote, “Saturday’s indirect talks with the US can already be counted as ‘one-nil in favor of the Islamic Republic.’”

Javan, a newspaper affiliated with the Revolutionary Guard, argued that the United States is in historic decline and that Trump is trying to mask this weakness through personal branding.

“His insistence on humiliating the leaders of other countries is also tied to this same issue: he has no hope for a long-term and reliable resolution to America’s challenges and is merely seeking temporary fixes,” the paper said. It added that Trump knows he cannot overpower Iran and is only seeking a deal to claim a symbolic victory.

Let me know if you'd like a version tailored for a particular outlet or tone (e.g. more neutral, more analytical, or more critical).

On this episode of Eye for Iran, a powerhouse panel of experts unpacks what’s really at stake and what each side hopes to gain.

The Islamic Republic is fundamentally transactional—and deeply motivated to strike a deal in order to survive, says Arash Azizi, an Iran analyst and author of What Iranians Want.

“The result of a failure of the talks is no longer, oh, there will be a lot more sanctions, you have to deal with it economically but an escalation that could be really devastating to Iran as a nation,” said Azizi.

Pressure is mounting. Former President Donald Trump has not only issued verbal warnings but deployed strategic bombers to the Indian Ocean. The US military has also moved a Patriot missile defense battalion from the Indo-Pacific to the Middle East—a major logistical feat involving at least 73 C-17 cargo flights, according to Axios.

On Wednesday, Trump said that Israel could lead a potential strike on Iran should the nuclear talks collapse. The announcement came just two days after he blindsided Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at the White House by revealing direct negotiations with Tehran.

“If it requires military, we’re going to have military,” Trump said during a press briefing in the Oval Office.

Meanwhile, Iran continues inching closer to nuclear weapons capability. Though Tehran insists its program is peaceful, the UN nuclear watchdog has warned that Iran now possesses enough uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels to make several nuclear bombs.

“I think they are very motivated, as real estate agents say, to get a deal,” added Azizi.

Behnam Ben Taleblu, Senior Director of the FDD’s Iran program, argues that while the Iranian establishment is ideological, it can still be pressured. “If the president wants to give diplomacy a chance, the best way to do that is to make sure that Iran doesn't have credible exit options—meaning Iran's option away from the table should not be better for the regime than the option to come to the table.”

Jay Solomon of The Free Press warns that Iran may use talks to buy time. “What's still kind of confusing is the person who's negotiating it, Steve Witkoff, and his positions, at least publicly, of what a deal would look like is a lot different than what Mike Waltz the national security advisor—he's talked about essentially dismantling the whole program.”

Solomon also pointed to rifts within the Trump camp.

“His (Witkoff) diplomacy in recent weeks was on Tucker Carlson, and Carlson himself has almost daily been lobbying very publicly against any military strikes on Iran … you can see these tensions inside the Trump administration between kind of these hawkish, almost traditional conservative Republicans like Waltz. But then you have this wing of the MAGA movement.”

Gabriel Noronha, former Special Advisor for the Iran Action Group at the State Department, sees these talks as a test—not a breakthrough.

"This is really President Trump saying that there's one last way out for Iran to avoid the disastrous fate which it has put itself into… an easy way out of this predicament or there's the hard way out, the hard way out being military strikes.”

An official familiar with the preparations was cited by Reuters as saying that the two delegations will meet in the same room.

It’s a pivotal moment—one that could reset the trajectory of US-Iran relations. Whether diplomacy prevails or war looms will likely be decided behind closed doors in Oman.

You can watch the full episode of Eye for Iran on YouTube or listen on any major podcast platform like Spotify, Apple, Amazon or Castbox.

Media outlets in Tehran, including those close to his office, have been highlighting that without Khamenei’s support there would be no talks with the Trump administration. However, Friday prayer imams who work under his control, slammed negotiations in their sermons, saying that it is beneath Iran to enter diplomatic bargaining with Washington.

“Negotiating with America is against our national pride,” said Ahmad Alamolhoda, the firebrand imam of Mashhad, during his sermon on Friday, according to the semi-official Mehr news agency. “No Iranian with self-respect would accept to approach the US empty-handed.”

He added that US demands—ranging from dismantling Iran’s missile program to limiting its regional influence—amounted to surrender. “They want us to give up everything: our weapons, our science, even our pride. No honorable Iranian would accept that.”

Calling on Iran’s negotiators to resist pressure, Alamolhoda warned: “Direct talks are worse than indirect ones. We’ve been here before—and it always ends badly.”

Khamenei banned negotiations with Washington one day after President Donald Trump renewed his maximum pressure on Tehran in early February. However, the mood gradually changed, as Trump repeatedly issued military threats and a large US naval force gathered in the region.

President Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed on Wednesday that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi will conduct upcoming talks with US representatives in Oman under Khamenei's guidance.

The conservative daily Khorasan, which is closely affiliated with parliamentary speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, echoed this stance. The paper noted that despite previously opposing direct engagement, Khamenei has now approved the indirect negotiations and is expected to closely oversee their progress.

However, Khamenei has allowed prominent Friday Imams, who wield power in their cities and provinces, to speak out against the negotiations. The Supreme Leader adopted a similar stance during the Obama administration when the JCPOA nuclear deal was being negotiated. He reluctantly admitted that he allowed the talks but often voiced doubt if the outcome would be beneficial.

“Direct talks are beneath us,” said Tehran’s interim Friday prayer Imam Kazem Sedighi during his weekly sermon, according to the semi-official Tasnim news agency. “How can we trust those who tore up the [JCPOA] deal?”

Sedighi said any engagement with Washington must be approached with caution, citing Khamenei’s guidance that negotiations should only take place when there is certainty the other side will honor its commitments.

“There is no room left for negotiation where they try to take the nuclear industry from us,” he said.

Other Friday imams argued that lifting sanctions is not a good enough reason for negotiating with Trump. They reverted to Khamenei’s calls of strengthening the Islamic Republic from within – an ideology that has failed to create a stable economy. Iran’s currency has tumbled 22-fold since 2018 and incomes have nosedived, pushing close to half the population into poverty. Workers' salaries are now barely above $100 per month.

An Iranian hardline lawmaker also said on Friday that the upcoming talks must center on proving Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons, warning that any effort to dismantle the country’s nuclear program would make talks unacceptable.

“In the talks with the US, we must prove that Iran is not pursuing the construction of a nuclear weapon,” Mousa Ghazanfariabadi said, according to the Mehr news agency.

“But if the other side tries to shut down Iran’s nuclear program or raise unrelated issues, the negotiation is invalid and unacceptable,” he added.