A senior Iranian official told CNN on Friday that a potential agreement hinges on Washington releasing $24 billion in frozen Iranian funds, warning the United States would enter a "dark corridor" if it resumes military action.
The comments came as Iran also tied the future of a broader peace arrangement to developments in Lebanon, Hezbollah and the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz.
For President Donald Trump, the standoff is testing whether his mix of pressure, unpredictability and military force can break a negotiating playbook that has frustrated successive US administrations.
"The Islamic Republic gets a vote here too," Jason Brodsky, policy director at United Against Nuclear Iran, told Eye for Iran. "The Iranian regime plays a much longer game than the United States does in terms of its strategic patience and strategy."
Brodsky said Iran has historically used prolonged negotiations to wear down international demands, pointing to how the original US position of zero enrichment eventually gave way to the 2015 nuclear deal's limited enrichment framework.
But he argued Trump has changed the baseline by demonstrating a willingness to use force.
"For the first time in decades, the Islamic Republic is not enriching uranium," Brodsky said, crediting US and Israeli military action with changing the facts on the ground.
Can Trump outlast Tehran's long game?
Former US diplomat Alberto Fernandez said Trump may possess an advantage previous administrations lacked: the ability to walk away from a deal while maintaining pressure.
"No deal is better than a bad deal," Fernandez said, arguing that Trump could refuse sanctions relief, maintain the blockade and preserve the threat of future strikes if Tehran refuses to compromise.
Still, there are concerns that Iran's strategy may be working in more subtle ways. Tehran has long relied on protracted negotiations to buy time, lower demands and secure concessions incrementally.
Daily Mail special correspondent David Patrikarakos warned that if Iran secures a limited nuclear agreement without restrictions on missiles or regional activity, it could still claim victory.
"If what Iran gets is a ring-fenced nuclear deal, then honestly, it's a defeat and it is a win for the Iranians," he said.
The question is whether Trump can sustain pressure long enough to force a broader agreement—or whether domestic politics, oil prices and regional tensions ultimately push Washington toward a narrower deal.
Is Iran's leverage shrinking?
That question extends beyond the nuclear file.
In Lebanon, President Joseph Aoun delivered a rare public rebuke to Tehran this week, accusing Iran of using his country as a "bargaining chip" in its confrontation with Washington and Israel.
"You are not trying to help us," Aoun told CNN. "The people of Lebanon are paying the price for the sake of your own interest."
He also directed a message to Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps: "It's not your country, it's our country."
The comments reflect growing frustration among Lebanese officials who argue their country has paid the price for regional conflicts driven by outside powers.
May Farhat, Iran International's correspondent in Beirut, said Hezbollah is facing one of the weakest periods in its history after major military and political setbacks.
"There is little doubt that Hezbollah is going through one of the most difficult periods in its history," Farhat told Eye for Iran.
She pointed to the killing of senior commanders, the loss of Hassan Nasrallah, tighter border controls and new Lebanese restrictions on Iranian access as evidence that the balance of power inside Lebanon is shifting.
For the first time in years, Lebanese authorities have suspended direct Iranian flights, tightened visa requirements for Iranian citizens and moved to limit Tehran's influence over strategic infrastructure and border crossings.
The weakening of Hezbollah matters because it potentially reduces one of Tehran's most important sources of regional leverage at a moment when Iran is attempting to negotiate from a position of strength.
The Strait of Hormuz represents another test of Iran's leverage.
For decades, the Islamic Republic has used the threat of disruption in the waterway as one of its most powerful strategic tools. But according to Homayoun Falakshahi, who leads Kpler's crude oil analysis team, that leverage may already be eroding.
Falakshahi said oil tanker traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has fallen dramatically since the war and the US blockade on Iranian ports. Before the conflict, roughly 30 oil tankers transited the waterway daily. Today, the average is closer to one or two.
More importantly, he argues that the crisis is accelerating efforts by Gulf states to reduce their dependence on the strait altogether.
Abu Dhabi is already expanding export capacity through Fujairah on the Gulf of Oman, while other producers are exploring alternative routes.
"Five years from now, that leverage that the Islamic Republic currently has probably will not exist anymore," Falakshahi said.
He believes Iran may be overestimating the long-term value of its position.
"They always overplay their hand," he said.
While the disruption of the Strait of Hormuz has demonstrated Tehran's ability to shake global energy markets, Falakshahi argues that the strategy ultimately hurts Iran's own interests by damaging China, its most important oil customer and strategic partner.
"I don't think they have the upper hand," he said. "Even though they want everyone to believe that they have."
For now, Iran is testing the limits: in Lebanon, in the Persian Gulf, at sea and at the negotiating table.
Trump may have disrupted Tehran's playbook. But whether he has cracked it will depend on whether pressure produces a durable agreement—or simply another pause in a decades-long confrontation.
