Iran’s Abbas Araqchi Signals Nuclear Talks with US on Equal Terms

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi hints at nuclear talks with the US, but only on equal footing, amid Trump’s renewed pressure campaign in 2025.

The diplomatic chessboard between Tehran and Washington is heating up once again. On Thursday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi offered a rare glimmer of openness to nuclear negotiations with the United States, but with a firm caveat: talks must unfold on a level playing field. Speaking to the state-run Iran newspaper, Araqchi underscored that any dialogue under the shadow of President Donald Trump’s “maximum pressure” tactics would be a non-starter. “If we enter negotiations while the other side is imposing maximum pressure, we will be negotiating from a weak position and will achieve nothing,” he said, his words carrying the weight of a seasoned diplomat navigating one of the world’s most fraught rivalries.

This latest exchange comes hot on the heels of Trump’s bold outreach to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Last week, the U.S. president revealed he’d dispatched a letter proposing nuclear talks, dangling both a carrot and a stick: negotiate a deal or face military consequences. For a nation that’s weathered years of economic strangulation and regional turbulence, Araqchi’s response signals a cautious willingness to engage—provided the U.S. abandons its hardball approach. But with Khamenei, the ultimate arbiter of Iran’s fate, warning that talks would only tighten the noose of sanctions, the path to dialogue remains treacherous.

A Diplomatic Tightrope in Tehran

Araqchi’s stance reflects a delicate balancing act. On one hand, he’s keeping the door ajar for a potential breakthrough in US-Iran relations—a prospect that’s tantalized diplomats since the collapse of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). On the other, he’s echoing Khamenei’s deep-seated mistrust of American intentions, a sentiment forged through decades of hostility. “The other side must be convinced that the policy of pressure is ineffective—only then can we sit at the negotiating table on equal terms,” Araqchi told Iran. It’s a calculated message: Iran won’t bend, but it might bargain if the terms are fair.

The timing couldn’t be more critical. As of March 2025, Iran’s economy is still reeling from sanctions reimposed after Trump’s 2018 withdrawal from the JCPOA, a deal that once promised sanctions relief in exchange for nuclear curbs. Tehran retaliated a year later by ramping up uranium enrichment, edging closer to weapons-grade levels—a move that’s alarmed the West and fueled calls for action. According to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium now stands at over 5,000 kilograms, far exceeding JCPOA limits. Yet Tehran insists its program is peaceful, a claim bolstered by Khamenei’s 2003 fatwa banning nuclear weapons.

Trump’s High-Stakes Gamble

Across the Atlantic, Trump’s return to the White House has revived his signature “maximum pressure” playbook. In early February, he signed a presidential memorandum aimed at slashing Iran’s oil exports to zero, a strategy that crippled Tehran’s finances during his first term. The U.S. Treasury Department reports that Iran’s oil revenues plummeted by 70% between 2018 and 2020 under similar measures, pushing inflation to record highs and sparking domestic unrest. Now, with Trump doubling down, Araqchi’s insistence on “equal terms” feels like a direct rebuke to a policy that’s long sought to force Iran’s hand.

But Trump’s letter to Khamenei hints at a dual-track approach. “There are two ways Iran can be handled: militarily, or you make a deal,” he warned last week, a statement that’s rattled nerves in Tehran and beyond. Analysts see it as vintage Trump—bluster paired with an invitation to the table. “He’s playing both the bad cop and the good cop,” says Dr. Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. “The question is whether Iran sees this as a genuine opening or just another trap.”

For now, Khamenei isn’t biting. On Wednesday, the Supreme Leader dismissed Trump’s overture as a ploy to “tighten the knot of sanctions and increase pressure on Iran.” His words carry weight: as Iran’s ultimate decision-maker, Khamenei’s skepticism could scuttle any hope of talks before they begin. Yet Araqchi’s more measured tone suggests a faction within Tehran’s leadership might be willing to test the waters—if the U.S. blinks first.

The Ghost of JCPOA

The specter of the 2015 nuclear deal looms large over this unfolding drama. Crafted after years of painstaking negotiations, the JCPOA was hailed as a triumph of diplomacy, easing sanctions in exchange for strict limits on Iran’s nuclear activities. Araqchi, then a deputy foreign minister, played a pivotal role in those talks, earning a reputation as a steely negotiator with a mastery of the nuclear file. But when Trump pulled the U.S. out in 2018, calling it “the worst deal ever,” the agreement unraveled. Iran’s subsequent breaches—enriching uranium to 60% purity, far above the JCPOA’s 3.67% cap—have left the deal on life support.

Could it be revived? Araqchi has hinted at flexibility, telling Iran that indirect talks via European powers or other JCPOA signatories (Russia, China, France, Germany, and the UK) remain on the table. In January, he met with British, French, and German diplomats in Geneva, a session he described as “serious, frank, and constructive.” A fifth round of talks with these powers is slated for later this month, with a separate meeting planned in Beijing alongside Russia and China. It’s a diplomatic flurry that suggests Tehran is hedging its bets—keeping channels open while rebuffing Trump’s pressure tactics.

Regional Ripples and Global Stakes

The stakes extend far beyond Tehran and Washington. A nuclear-armed Iran—or even the perception of one—could ignite an arms race in the Middle East, where rivals like Saudi Arabia and Israel are watching closely. Israel, in particular, has long viewed Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who met with Trump in February, has pushed for a harder line, arguing that Iran’s defenses are weakened and ripe for a strike. “Time is running out,” he warned last month, a sentiment echoed by U.S. hawks.

Yet military action carries its own risks. Araqchi told Al Jazeera in January that an attack on Iran’s nuclear sites would spark “all-out war in the region”—a chilling prospect given Iran’s network of proxies, from Hezbollah in Lebanon to militias in Iraq and Yemen. The U.S. Institute of Peace estimates that such a conflict could draw in multiple nations, disrupt global oil supplies, and displace millions. For now, diplomacy remains the less volatile path, but it hinges on whether Trump and Tehran can find common ground.

Voices from the Ground

Iranians, meanwhile, are caught in the crossfire. Sanctions have driven unemployment to 12.4% and inflation to nearly 40%, according to Iran’s Statistical Center. In Tehran’s bazaars, merchants like Reza Hosseini, 47, feel the squeeze. “We want peace, not more pressure,” he told me via a translator. “But we won’t bow to anyone.” It’s a sentiment that mirrors Araqchi’s rhetoric—and underscores the domestic pressure Tehran’s leaders face to stand firm.

Across the U.S., opinions are just as divided. A February 2025 Gallup poll found 54% of Americans support renewed nuclear talks with Iran, while 41% favor tougher sanctions or military action. “We can’t keep kicking this can down the road,” says Sarah Miller, a 32-year-old teacher from Ohio. “But war isn’t the answer either.”

Looking Ahead: A Fragile Hope

As March 2025 unfolds, the world watches a high-stakes game of brinkmanship. Araqchi’s call for “equal terms” is more than a negotiating stance—it’s a test of whether Trump’s second term will lean toward deal-making or confrontation. With Iran’s nuclear clock ticking and the JCPOA set to expire in October, the window for diplomacy is narrowing. Experts like Parsi warn that without a breakthrough, “we’re heading toward a point of no return.”

For readers wondering what’s next, the takeaway is clear: stay informed. Track developments through reputable sources like the IAEA or Reuters, and consider the human cost behind the headlines. Whether Tehran and Washington find a way forward—or spiral into conflict—will shape the Middle East and beyond for years to come.

(Disclaimer:  This article is based on publicly available information as of March 13, 2025, and reflects the author’s interpretation of current events. It does not represent official statements from the U.S. or Iranian governments. For the latest updates, consult primary sources or news outlets.)

Also Read:  South Korean Pilots Face Charges After Accidental Village Bombing