Iran’s political leadership is closing ranks ahead of a crucial new round of nuclear negotiations set to take place in Muscat, Oman this week. The impending talks, designed to address mounting international concern over Tehran’s nuclear advances, come as Iran’s former foreign minister and longtime atomic chief, Ali Akbar Salehi, issued a rare public endorsement of the Islamic Republic’s lead negotiator, Abbas Araghchi. Salehi’s message is widely interpreted by diplomats and analysts as a sign of regime unity and determination at a moment of profound regional volatility.
Salehi served as Iran’s foreign minister from 2011 to 2013 and led the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran through the turbulent years of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) negotiations and fallout. His statement expressing confidence in Araghchi as he heads into make-or-break talks, coupled with an explicit call to defend Iran’s national interests, underlines how seriously Tehran takes the current diplomatic stand-off.
The negotiations, hosted by Oman, are seen as a last significant opportunity for Iran to secure sanctions relief and international legitimacy, even as it preserves its nuclear infrastructure. The talks are pitted against a tense regional backdrop marked by Israel’s relentless efforts to deny Iran a nuclear weapons capability—a stance Israeli officials have described as non-negotiable due to the existential threat posed to the Jewish state and regional stability.
The current security environment is fraught with danger. Since Hamas terrorists—backed by Iranian support and training—carried out the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust in southern Israel on October 7, 2023, the region has seen an unprecedented level of violence and instability. Israel’s subsequent military response in Gaza and actions against Iranian-aligned militias along its northern borders underscore the depth of the crisis.
A new era of multi-front confrontation has emerged, with Iran’s so-called ‘axis of resistance’—including Hamas in Gaza, Hezbollah in Lebanon, Iraqi and Syrian militias, and the Houthis in Yemen—refusing to ease pressure on Israel. This has forced Israeli military planners to constantly adapt, and amplified Jerusalem’s warnings to its allies and rivals alike that it will do whatever it takes to prevent nuclear-armed terrorism in the region.
Iran’s nuclear program has long been at the center of this conflict. Since the U.S. withdrawal from the JCPOA in 2018, Tehran has steadily breached key limits on uranium enrichment, expanded advanced centrifuge use, and restricted international monitoring. Israeli officials and defense experts have documented repeated cases of clandestine Iranian activity and have repeatedly stated that Iran’s true objective is a nuclear weapons threshold status, which it seeks to leverage in regional power struggles. According to Israeli and Western analysts, the quick pace of these advances might bring Iran within weeks of a weapons-capable breakout, with devastating implications for the region and beyond.
Amid this dangerous environment, Salehi’s public endorsement of Araghchi is viewed by regional observers as a message that Tehran’s negotiating posture has the full backing of the supreme leadership and key technocrats alike. Salehi, as both a scientist and a diplomat, has consistently articulated the regime’s view that its nuclear program is sacrosanct and a vital component of national sovereignty, regardless of outside pressure.
Israel and its allies are watching these developments with grave concern. For Jerusalem, the stakes are nothing less than national survival. The legacy of October 7th, when Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists unleashed scenes of horror unprecedented since the Holocaust, continues to inform Israeli security thinking. Israeli officials argue that if the world could so profoundly underestimate the genocidal intent of Iran’s proxies, it would be sheer folly to trust Iranian pledges regarding nuclear ambitions.
Oman, often a discreet intermediary in regional diplomacy, is hosting the talks in hopes of finding a formula to reduce tensions and restore a measure of international oversight. However, there is deep skepticism within Israeli and U.S. security circles about the efficacy of renewed negotiations. Many believe that Iran’s leadership is intent on using talks as a means of relieving economic pressure and legitimizing its nuclear advances, rather than accepting real limits or intrusive monitoring.
The Biden administration faces its own dilemmas. While seeking to curb Iran’s nuclear program diplomatically and reduce the risk of open conflict, Washington has been frustrated by the regime’s continued proxy warfare throughout the Middle East. U.S. officials warn that even incremental sanctions relief—absent verifiable and irreversible Iranian concessions—could embolden Tehran’s regional agenda, putting both Israel and America’s Arab partners at greater risk.
Regional partners, such as the moderate Arab states aligned with Israel in the Abraham Accords, share this skepticism. Many see Iran’s nuclear advances and terrorism-by-proxy as a common threat to peace and development throughout the Middle East. Informal security dialogues and intelligence-sharing—previously unthinkable—have flourished in the wake of the October 7th attacks, with Israel emerging as a vital security partner for Gulf States who fear Iranian aggression just as deeply.
Inside Iran, voices such as Salehi’s serve to both reassure the regime’s hardliners and signal resolve to outside observers. The former foreign minister has decades of experience in nuclear diplomacy and is intimately familiar with the tactics deployed to withstand international scrutiny and pressure. His professional history during the 2015 JCPOA negotiations and subsequent leadership of the Atomic Energy Organization make him a credible spokesman for national interests—and a reminder that technical and political elites in Tehran are aligned in fending off outside limitations.
Yet, for Israel, none of this reassurance within the Iranian system changes the basic equation. Decades of genocidal rhetoric, combined with proven operational capacity by terror proxies from Gaza to Yemen, render trust in the Islamic Republic’s claims all but impossible. Israeli leaders, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, have repeatedly stated that all necessary means, including direct military action, remain on the table to prevent a nuclear Iran.
The Oman summit may produce diplomatic theater and short-term agreements, but the historical context is clear: Iran’s regime has shown a consistent pattern of using negotiations to mask continued advancements and buy time. Israeli intelligence assessments have repeatedly warned that unless the international community applies sustained, credible pressure, Tehran will not abandon its quest for a strategic nuclear option—one that it believes will allow it to shield and reinforce its terror proxies indefinitely.
As Araghchi and the Iranian delegation prepare for the spotlight in Oman, the subtext is unmissable. The struggle over Iran’s nuclear program is inseparable from the larger campaign for the region’s future. On one side stands Israel and its partners, fighting to ensure that never again will genocidal intent or terrorism be legitimized by international neglect. On the other side, the Islamic Republic, wielding diplomacy and violence in equal measure in pursuit of hegemony.
The stakes of these talks go far beyond Iran’s centrifuges or enrichment levels. At issue is the fundamental security architecture of the Middle East for generations to come. In this battle, as recent history tragically underscores, only unwavering vigilance and moral clarity can ensure the defense of Israel and the possibility of a more peaceful future.
