Slightly edited on DS.
On the sidelines of the Iran-U.S. Talks in Oman
The Conditions Under Which the Regime of Iran Agrees to Negotiate with the U.S.
The first round of "indirect” negotiations between Iran and the United States was held on Saturday, April 12 in Muscat, the capital of Oman.
In these talks, the Iranian delegation was led by Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, while the American delegation was headed by Steve Witkoff. Both sides described the discussions as “positive and constructive,” and the negotiations are scheduled to continue in Rome, Italy, next Saturday, April 19, 2025.
The talks were conducted in written form and were “indirect.” Fewer than ten documents were exchanged between the two sides. The first document was delivered by Araghchi. The content of the document has not yet been made public. In his messages, Araghchi stated that Iran had not come to Muscat for show, rather, Tehran's main goal is to assess the sincerity and seriousness of the American side and to determine the feasibility of reaching an agreement.
It was emphasized that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will be the only foreign body allowed to oversee Iran’s nuclear program. In exchange for nuclear restrictions and monitoring, Tehran is demanding the lifting of sanctions in several sectors. Furthermore, once these sanctions are lifted, the United States must not reimpose them under other pretexts.
Araghchi also stipulated that a general framework agreement is essential for the continuation of the negotiations. If the U.S. rejects Iran’s proposed framework in the first session, it must present an alternative for Iran to review.
On Saturday, Iran told the U.S. that the responsibility for ensuring the "snapback mechanism" is not activated rests entirely with Washington. Witkoff brought two individuals with him to Muscat, one of whom is a nuclear affairs expert.
The European Troika (UK, France, and Germany) is deeply concerned about being sidelined in this process.
The White House, in a statement, described the first round of talks in Oman as “very positive and constructive.”
The statement read: “Special envoy Witkoff emphasized to Dr. Araghchi that he has been tasked by President Trump to resolve the disputes between the two countries through dialogue and diplomacy, if possible.”
The statement continued: “These issues are very complex, and today’s direct engagement by the U.S. special envoy was a step forward toward achieving a mutually beneficial outcome.” The White House also announced that both sides will meet again next Saturday (April 19).
Now, considering the rapid developments in recent months, the intensifying psychological warfare, and rising tensions between Iran and the United States, it is worth examining several key points regarding the reasons behind these negotiations and their objectives.
Iran Is Negotiating with the U.S. from a Position of Weakness.
The capitalist regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran has agreed to these negotiations while in a position of weakness. This is a repetition of modern Iranian history. When the former leader of the Islamic Republic, Ruhollah Khomeini, drank the "chalice of poison" to end a futile war, leaving half of it behind in the cup for other leaders of the Islamic Republic to inherit, so they too could eventually drink it in full under the guise of "revolutionary flexibility" and "revolutionary expediency" in negotiations with the United States.
The Supreme Leader's labeling of negotiations with Donald Trump's administration as dishonorable, and then suddenly reversing course a few days later by accepting "indirect" talks with the U.S. in Oman, came as a cold-water shock to his supporters.
The reality is that, after decades of political repression and implementing a chaotic neoliberal economic system, the Islamic Republic has lost much of its domestic and regional capabilities. Now, solely for the sake of its own survival, it is conceding on Iran's national interests in the face of U.S. imperialist bullying, and accepting unprincipled compromises.
The regime entered the negotiations at a time when its political and military influence in Lebanon, Palestine, Iraq, and elsewhere has significantly diminished, and in Syria, it has lost its influence entirely.
The illegal economic, political, cultural and especially financial siege of Iran has severely weakened the country’s economic and financial foundations. This has forced the regime to shift the burden of this devastating crisis onto the shoulders of the Iranian people, particularly the working class and the lower segments of society.
The regime’s cronies, rent-seekers, corrupt families, and collaborators, the pirates looting Iran’s national resources on land, remain untouched by the pressure of these sanctions. They continue to funnel billions in foreign currency to overseas bank accounts on behalf of the Islamic Republic's leaders. Meanwhile, these inhumane sanctions, which bring inflation, unemployment, and poverty, have fueled a wave of social discontent within Iran, weakening the regime’s popular base. As a result, the government now leans heavily on the small ruling elite; those who benefit from the privileges of the Islamic Republic. The regime grows increasingly fearful of the people’s struggle and resistance.
In response, it resorts to repression, censorship, and the imprisonment of critics to maintain its grip on power. The Islamic Republic is primarily focused on saving its own rule, which means that preserving Iran’s independence and national interests is no longer a fundamental priority.
These realities are not hidden, especially not from imperialist powers, chief among them the United States. In fact, the U.S., which has played an active role in creating this situation, has access to extensive intelligence on the regime through its electronic surveillance agencies. It is well-aware of which regime officials have stolen money and how much they have stashed in foreign banks.
American imperialism spares no effort in provoking and sabotaging Iran’s border regions through the establishment of military bases nearby, provocations in the Persian Gulf, and the use of unmanned aerial vehicles for surveillance over Iranian territory.
Among these developments, the joint U.S.-British naval base in Diego Garcia has recently become a new focal point for escalating tensions. B2 bombers have been stationed there; the same type of aircraft that have been used in recent months to carry out attacks on Yemen. In response, Iran has issued serious warnings, declaring that any act of aggression will be met with a decisive reaction. This is not the first time Washington has deployed warships to the region.
Meanwhile, the “1945” digital news platform reported on this U.S. move, stating: "B2 stealth bombers are now gathering at Diego Garcia." The report adds that the world is now aware that the United States has transferred around one-quarter of its B2 Spirit stealth bomber fleet to Diego Garcia, the island that hosts the U.S. naval base in the Indo-Pacific region.
Under such conditions, marked by growing public discontent, the Islamic Republic of Iran has consented to negotiations with the United States. Yet, from the outset, the outcome of these talks bears the seeds of a bitter and ultimately fruitless harvest for Iran and its people.
The Islamic Republic, as a capitalist regime, has long adhered to the policies of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund — adopting their views on suppressing Iran’s working class, reducing wages, preventing strikes, banning the formation of independent labour unions, restricting the political activity of grassroots political organizations, dismantling customs protections, pushing forward privatization, and sacrificing the wealth of the Iranian people to the interests of these Western imperialist institutions.
The leadership of this policy began with President Rafsanjani and has been continued by all administrations of subsequent presidents; from Mohammad Khatami to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hassan Rouhani, Ebrahim Raisi, and now Masoud Pezeshkian.
In the past, the Islamic Republic shamefully retreated on Iran’s nuclear issue, surrendering its legitimate rights. By betraying national interests, it signed the infamous JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), thereby squandering countless opportunities and dismantling or suspending vital nuclear activities, all in the misguided hope that the U.S. imperialists would pursue peaceful relations with the regime. Yet the more the Iranian regime complies with Washington’s demands, the more emboldened the U.S. becomes in its efforts to extract further concessions.
American imperialists seek the very life of Iran. They demand that Iran recognize Israel, become a major American base in the region against China and Russia, and allow the U.S. free rein in Iran, to plunder resources without limit and to install or remove governments at will.
Obviously, such imperialist bullying poses a serious threat to the survival of the Iranian regime. The Islamic Republic’s pivot toward China and Russia, a shift it avoided until the end of Donald Trump’s first term due to pressure from American-aligned factions within Iran, is not simply a matter of internal preference. It is also the result of the maximum pressure campaign and inhumane sanctions imposed by the U.S. from outside, which drove Iran further eastward.
Even the signing of the 25-year cooperation agreement with China was delayed until after Joe Biden came to power, as the Rouhani faction still held out hope for reconciliation with the U.S. However, once Biden took office and it became clear that the aggression against China, Russia, Iran, North Korea, and possibly even India, was part of his strategic agenda in the region, Iran's leadership lost all illusions about compromise or making concessions to the United States.
Naturally, the imperialist China also observed these developments and recognized that Iran was negotiating from a weakened position, a reality that would take it into account. The Iranian government approached China with caution, always keeping one eye on the United States. But Biden dashed all the regime’s hopes, breaking the resistance of the pro-American faction within Iran, even before Iran’s own elections. Now, with the return of Donald Trump to power, the situation has changed dramatically. The regional crisis has deepened, and Iran’s allied forces have also become weaker.
What is the United States' objective in engaging in negotiations, and what are its demands from Iran.
Our party has repeatedly stated and emphasized that the issue of Iran’s nuclear program is just an excuse and does not have serious significance. Iran has been under the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) for years, and even U.S. intelligence agencies have stated that Iran does not have nuclear weapons and is not pursuing the production of such weapons. Yet, despite this, the U.S. continues its lies, hostility, and sabotage, maintaining its political, economic, and psychological pressures against the regime and the country.
The truth is that U.S. imperialists have long set their policy regarding Iran. Ultimately, they want Iran to become a semi-colonial state, like it was under the Shah. They want a country that acts as the regional gendarme, collaborating with imperialists to plunder the region’s energy resources and ensure their extraction and transfer to Western markets. They want Iran to oppose China, Russia, and, at the appropriate time, India, Japan, and possibly Europe, so that the U.S. can control the geopolitical and energy chokepoint of the world, tightening or loosening the grip at will. They want Iran to be aligned with them, not with China, in their strategic policy in the Pacific Ocean in the coming decades.
Their issue, contrary to the claims of misled or self-serving Iranians, is not the enrichment of uranium or the nuclear issue. For this reason, Donald Trump, like his predecessor, lies: the Iranian nuclear weapon is just a pretext, a propaganda tool to rally public opinion and disarm Iran. The goal is to exhaust the adversary, offer negotiations and a “great deal,” prevent the production of nuclear weapons under any condition, stop Iran from supporting resistance movements like Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Houthis in Yemen, and ultimately address issues like missiles and drones. These are the demands of the U.S. to disarm Iran in favor of the interests and strategic objectives of American imperialism and Israeli Zionism in the region.
What is Donald Trump’s Tactic Toward Iran?
In his second term as president, Donald Trump has entered the arena with a new tactic. Whereas he used to speak about Iran in an aggressive and threatening tone, this time he has adopted a different and seemingly peace-seeking rhetoric. In a message he recently released, he emphasized that he "wishes success for Iran," but at the same time, he reiterated his red line regarding Iran’s acquisition of nuclear weapons.
While in recent months there has been speculation about a potential escalation in military tensions and even the possibility of a joint U.S.-Israeli military action against Iran, Trump dismissed these claims as "exaggerated" and instead spoke of the idea of a "credible nuclear peace deal." He even suggested that, after signing such an agreement, a "major Middle Eastern celebration" should be held.
This shift in Trump’s tone is no coincidence. During his first term of presidency, he pursued a "maximum pressure" policy against Iran and withdrew from the nuclear deal (JCPOA). With this new message, he is aiming to create the perception among the Iranian public that the leaders of the Islamic Republic themselves are the obstacle to resolving the nuclear issue. In such a context, if sanctions are intensified or even a military action occurs, Trump will attempt placing the blame for the crisis on Iran rather than on U.S. policies.
The Islamic Republic’s Capitalist Regime at an Impasse
The continuation of the second round of "indirect negotiations" in Italy, the resulting optimism in Iranian public opinion, and the temporary dip in the value of the dollar are merely short-term remedies to escape a deep political and economic crisis in Iran. The current situation in Iran is likely to persist in this state for some time, with increasing disorder. Economic sanctions will not be lifted, and even if they were, it would not translate into any real, practical transformation in Iran’s economic and financial life. The economic crisis and the hardships faced by the Iranian people stem primarily from domestic policies, with economic sanctions merely exacerbating the situation and not accounting for all of Iran’s current problems.
The industrial infrastructure, spare parts, or aircraft fleets that Iran needs are not sitting covered in dust in warehouses in imperialist countries, ready to be shipped. These items first need to be produced and then sent to Iran based on future economic agreements, a process that could take years. The unfreezing of Iran’s blocked assets in the United States does not mean these assets will be freely returned to Iran. The U.S. will not hand over cash to Iran; instead, in return for Iran stepping back from uranium enrichment, it will likely offer lines of credit that must be used to purchase American goods for export to Iran.
The U.S. will undoubtedly impose binding and restrictive agreements on Iran and pressure it to align with American policies in the region.
The Islamic Republic Regime: Isolated and at an Impasse
Since the 1979 revolution, the Islamic Republic has followed a path that has increasingly alienated it from the Iranian people. It has become the object of growing public resentment and ridicule. The regime has tried to rule through repression and coercion, attempting to control the population with brute force. As a result, it actively suppresses public debate over the true goals behind the "indirect negotiations" in Oman and Italy, especially when such discussions threaten to expose hidden agendas. These talks are concealed from the public, with no accountability to anyone.
This policy of distancing itself from the people is, in fact, welcomed by imperialist powers, as it makes it easier to pressure and manipulate the regime for their own interests. Today, the Islamic Republic finds itself at a dead end and can clearly see that it has lost one of its key regional allies, Syria. While Hezbollah in Lebanon still exists and is in the process of reorganizing and rebuilding, the region itself has changed.
It is now up to Iran to decide its course: either to reconcile with the United States and submit fully to its terms, or to rely on its people and resist the foreign imperialist threat and aggression. There is no longer a middle path. Every move the regime makes now reflects only its crisis, paralysis, and lack of clear direction.
What is the solution?
The only viable path forward for the Islamic Republic is to respect the rights of the people, meet their demands, allow political and labour organizations to operate freely, lift censorship from the mass media, and rebuild trust between the state and the public. It must arrest and prosecute corrupt officials and government-linked criminals and bring those responsible for execution of hundreds of thousands to justice in people’s courts. By doing so, it may build a mountain of popular support.
Only with that foundation of public backing can a country stand up to imperialist coercion and conspiracies. With the strength of such support, it could confront the threats and bullying of figures like Donald Trump, defend the national interests of the people. Through such a support, Iran can assert its rightful claim to peaceful nuclear energy use, or even, if necessary for national defense and deterrence, acquire nuclear weapons.
Through a policy of good-neighborly relations, Iran could also resist the plots of Zionism and regional reactionary forces. The destruction of Zionism depends on the governments mobilizing and respecting the rights of regional people.
But today, the Islamic Republic is trapped in a situation it can no longer escape. Ultimately, it appears the regime will be forced to throw itself into the arms of imperialism, hoping to shield itself from the “harm of events”.
In the Current Crisis, What Is the Duty of Communists?
In today’s critical situation, it is the duty of communists, specifically our Party, and all revolutionary forces to raise awareness about the betrayals of the Islamic Republic regime and to stand firmly against U.S. imperialism, its bullying, sanctions, and military threats. We must work toward the building and strengthening of independent organizations of the masses, especially the working class. We must not allow the regime to strike deals over the national interests of the Iranian people or to preserve its own rule through compromises with imperialism.
In the face of the potential danger of military aggression against Iran, communists must take to the field with clear and principled slogans. We must commit ourselves to mobilizing the public both within Iran and internationally. The slogan “Hands off Iran!” is the most accurate and effective rallying cry to unite the people and resist imperialist interference. This slogan embodies patriotism, anti-imperialism, and the power to mobilize millions in Iran as well as global public opinion.
Defending workers’ rights, specifically the fight to raise wages, establish independent labour unions, abolish exploitative contract labour systems, and stop privatizations and layoffs, are among the concrete tasks that must be carried out alongside the fight against foreign enemies. There is no alternative path out of this deadlock.
We must emphasize that, as history has repeatedly shown, in today’s era only the party of the working class, as the true representative of the proletariat, bears the historic mission of leading the struggle for liberation, defending Iran’s national independence and territorial integrity, and establishing socialism. Let us dedicate ourselves to this revolutionary and emancipatory goal, let us raise high the banner of this lofty goal!
The Party of Labour of Iran (Toufan)
April 16, 2025
(This is the English translation of the article published in Toufan No. 302)
Posts
