Iran’s foreign minister, Araghchi, said on February 7 that the venue for a second round of indirect talks with the United States may change, underlining Tehran’s cautious approach to a delicate bargaining process that began with a meeting in Muscat on February 6. The two sides met indirectly in Oman’s capital and agreed to continue talks, a modestly positive opening that nonetheless rests on fragile preconditions.
Araghchi reiterated a core Iranian red line: Tehran opposes transferring uranium out of the country, but he said Iran is prepared to reduce its enrichment levels. That formulation signals a willingness to make a technical concession while guarding the sovereignty and symbolic importance of domestic control over nuclear material.
The foreign minister also stressed that Iran does not want a regional war and that neighbouring states similarly seek to avoid conflict, but he warned that any American military action would complicate the situation and have consequential effects. His remarks stressed deterrence and were designed to place responsibility for escalation squarely on potential U.S. kinetic steps.
The Muscat talks were indirect and mediated by Oman, a familiar interlocutor between Tehran and Washington. Araghchi’s suggestion that the next round’s location could change points to operational and political sensitivities: a different host might offer more neutrality, security guarantees, or diplomatic cover for either side to make concessions without domestic backlash.
Why this matters: the negotiations touch on Iran’s nuclear program, non‑proliferation goals and regional stability. A compromise that lowers enrichment levels without moving uranium abroad could limit Iran’s near‑term breakout capacity while preserving Tehran’s claims of sovereignty, but success will depend on sequencing, verifiable inspection arrangements and credible assurances that threats and pressure will be removed from the table.
Observers should watch three things next: which third‑party state hosts the next round, the technical details and verification terms of any enrichment rollback, and whether either side seeks to link the talks to broader regional security or sanctions relief. The outcome will shape not only U.S.–Iran dynamics but also calculations in Israel, the Gulf monarchies and among European mediators.