We do not want a nuclear bomb, Iranian president says ahead of US talks

While some hardline lawmakers in the Iranian parliament reiterated their distrust of Washington on Tuesday, public sentiment—particularly online—appears more hopeful.

Despite continued criticism of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and frequent jokes about President Donald Trump “breaking the ayatollah’s will,” the mood on social media suggests widespread excitement and a degree of optimism about the talks.

In one of the first reactions to the announcement, former lawmaker Ali Motahari said, “Many in Iran want direct negotiations, and opponents of the talks cannot stand in their way.”

He added, “Whether direct or indirect, participating in negotiations is a decision backed by the entire Iranian political system.” According to Motahari, “a majority of Iranians want an agreement between Tehran and Washington—an agreement that would lift the sanctions.”

Public criticism of hardline figures like Kayhan editor Hossein Shariatmadari, along with a rise in the value of the Iranian currency, appeared to support Motahari’s point. He told Khabar Online that “hardliners only want to make their presence felt; beyond that, they can’t actually prevent negotiations.”

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi echoed a similar message in remarks to state television. “What matters is ensuring that both sides are serious about negotiating,” he said, while emphasizing again that no arrangement has been made for direct talks.

The shift in tone among Iranian officials in recent days, including military chief Mohammad Bagheri—who expressed support for negotiations—has signaled a broader change in the country’s mood toward diplomacy.

Former Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, in a post on X, expressed confidence in Araghchi's leadership. “It is heartwarming to know that Araghchi is heading the talks for Iran. He is knowledgeable, serious, and committed to reaching an agreement based on national interests and mutual respect. Things will go well if the US delegation approaches the talks with the same seriousness and respect for Iranian interests.”

Zarif added: “Now it is the United States’ turn to cooperate in building a better future for the region and the world.”

Commenting on Trump’s decision to announce the Oman talks himself, Iranian journalist Niloofar Ghadiri noted in a post on X: “One of the main differences in this round of negotiations is that the first leak to the media came directly from the US president.”

Meanwhile, Mohammad Hossein Khoshvaqt—a relative of Khamenei and director of the pro-reform Fararu website—offered a provocative comment on X: “What would you say if you found out that Iran had launched a one-trillion-dollar project and hadn’t barred American investors from participating?”

In contrast, hardline daily Kayhan pushed back forcefully on Trump’s claim that a military option remains on the table if talks fail. “America is bluffing,” the paper wrote in its first article on the statement. “There will be no military attack. Any US military action would cause havoc in the region.”

The editorial added: “Even a limited military action will provoke Iran to destroy the Israeli regime.”

Newsweek quoted the group, officially known as the "Islamic Resistance Front in Syria - Uli al-Baas," as saying it is aligned with the broader Axis of Resistance, a coalition of Iran-backed political and military actors in the Middle East such as Hamas in Gaza, the Houthis in Yemen, and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

"Uli al-Baas is a faith-based, revolutionary, nationalist movement with an Arab nationalist dimension, unaffiliated with any existing organization in Syria," the group's political office told Newsweek, adding that it does not support the current ruling government.

"It [the group] has its own political project of resistance that guarantees the establishment of a strong, capable, and freedom-supporting state," the group added.

While Uli al-Baas said that it is "not affiliated with any regional party or any country," logos used, particularly the raised Kalashnikov-style rifle, mirrors the signature style of Iran's Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) and has been adopted by other Axis of Resistance groups, including Hezbollah and Iraqi militias.

Newsweek also quoted the group speaking about the Islamic Republic, in what appeared to echo similar manifestos of Tehran's allied groups.

"As for the constant threat posed to the Islamic Republic of Iran, this is because it maintains an independent identity and refuses to submit," Uli al-Baas said,

"However, the truth is that Iran is challenging the advanced state in West Asia, namely the Zionist entity," the group added.

Experts suggest that the group may have originated from Iran’s efforts to maintain influence in Syria, a key Arab ally under the ousted Bashar al-Assad government.

“While UAB’s kinetic capabilities remain unproven, its emergence could signal the early stages of a new Iran-backed militia formation in Syria, an outcome that was always likely post-Assad,” a Washington Institute analysis said in March.

The group has since published the Newsweek story on their Telegram channel.

"The President should share with the Congress what his goals are," Murphy said. "I have no idea what he thinks he's going to achieve."

Trump announced on Monday during a joint Oval Office appearance with Israel's prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu that 'top level' negotiations will commence between the United States and Iran in Oman on Saturday.

Murphy cast doubt over the event's significance, accusing Trump of lying and not discussing his plans with lawmakers.

“Most of the stuff he says isn’t real ...He lies every single day," the Connecticut Senator said. "He engages in all sorts of negotiations that go nowhere and have no point. So this could be another version."

Trumps Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff and Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi will lead the talks, the exact arrangement of which remains unclear as Tehran insists it would be indirect.

Iran's supreme leader rejected direct negotiations with the United States last month, warning his officialdom that the Trump administration was not to be trusted after withdrawing from the 2015 nuclear deal during his first term.

Broder context

Republican Senator John Hoeven was more supportive of the plan to engage with Iran while it was weakened by Israeli onslaught in Gaza and Lebanon and American attacks on Houthis in Yemen.

“It’s very important that we have direct negotiations,” he told Iran International on Tuesday, adding that a deal that stops Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons would be unlikely without face-to-face engagement while hitting Tehran's regional allies.

“The Houthis are funded and supported by Iran. They are a proxy of Iran's,” he said. “So when we go after the Houthis, that's another way of going after Iran.”

President Trump has ordered several airstrikes on the rebel group, warning Tehran that it will be held responsible for all attacks emanating from Yemen.

Hoeven said the strikes were a message to Tehran that it has to stop supporting armed groups across the region.

“This state backed terror by Iran has to stop,” he said, listing groups like Hamas, Hezbollah and the Iran-backed groups in Iraq.

Iran’s Quds Force is managing the operation through its Unit 190 and Unit 700, according to the unidentified source. Shipments are arriving either directly to Lebanon or through intermediary countries.

Intelli Times also reported the same information about Quds Force involvement, citing the same two units.

“Hezbollah has refocused and reimposed its control over the port of Beirut,” the source said, referring to the facility’s gradual return to normal operations following the August 2020 explosion.

The Iran-backed group turned to sea routes after losing access to overland supply lines through Syria following the fall of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad and after Lebanese authorities curtailed its influence at Beirut’s Rafic Hariri International Airport following a US-French brokered ceasefire with Israel in November.

The source said Hezbollah operates freely at the port through a network inside customs and port oversight bodies, directed by senior Hezbollah official Wafiq Safa.

“Safa is seeking, through his agents at the port, to facilitate the smuggling of equipment, weapons and money without any inspection or oversight,” the source said.

The source warned that the use of Beirut Port by Hezbollah - designated a terrorist group by countries such as the UK and US - risks Lebanon’s economic interests and may deter foreign investment.

“The Lebanese state must act urgently in light of Hezbollah’s violations and plans, which could repeat the August 2020 catastrophe,” the source said.

Speaking in a separate interview with LBCI aired Sunday, US Deputy Special Envoy for the Middle East Morgan Ortagus said Hezbollah and all militias in Lebanon must be disarmed “as soon as possible.”

“We, of course, always bring up disarming Hezbollah, but not just Hezbollah, all militias in this country,” Ortagus said.

“Only by disarming militant groups could the Lebanese people be ‘free from foreign influence, free from terrorism, free from the fears that have been so pervasive in society.’”

Ortagus added that President Joseph Aoun had made it clear in his inaugural speech that “he wanted the state to have the monopoly of force, he wanted the state to be the one with the weapons. That is a position that we support.”

The Iranian side, as reiterated by government spokeswoman Fatemeh Mohajerani and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, maintains that Araghchi’s upcoming talks with US envoy Steve Witkoff in Oman will be conducted indirectly. However, Mohajerani did not explicitly rule out the possibility of direct negotiations, noting that Araghchi will lead Iran’s nuclear negotiating team as its highest-ranking official.

Both Araghchi and foreign ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baqaei had previously denied any negotiations were taking place—until Trump’s surprise Monday evening announcement during his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu changed the calculus.

Shahram Kholdi, a Middle East and international relations expert, told Iran International TV that Iran’s insistence on indirect talks stems from Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s stance that direct negotiations with the US would be dishonorable.

Jason Brodsky, policy director at United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI), offered a different interpretation. In a post on X, he suggested that Tehran may have been caught off guard by Trump’s announcement. According to Brodsky, the announcement was likely meant “to pressure Tehran and make it look unreasonable should it reject the meeting.” He added that indirect negotiations might still occur on Saturday, but both sides would be creative in defining what counts as direct or indirect.

Meanwhile, Nour News, a website close to Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, dismissed suggestions that Iran was responding to US pressure. In a post on X, the outlet stated that Iran had set the time and location of the talks in Oman and communicated them to the US through Omani intermediaries. “No one-sided narratives—the initiative was in Tehran's hands,” the post read.

Ali Nasri, a Tehran-based foreign relations expert, criticized the ongoing obsession with terminology. “The bias regarding the words ‘direct’ or ‘indirect’ in the matter of negotiations does not benefit the lives of the Iranian people,” he wrote on X. “What matters is whether the negotiation process is effective or ineffective. Whichever method is more effective in securing national interests is the right path.”

Hossein Mousavian, Iran’s ex-ambassador to Germany (1990–1997) and a former senior nuclear negotiator, offered a historical analogy. In an X post, he recalled how negotiations during the Obama administration in Istanbul began under the supervision of EU’s supervision Catherine Ashton but soon transitioned to direct talks between Iranian and American officials. He predicted a similar setup in Oman. “It seems that Washington and Tehran have adopted a wise approach, and there is a chance for an agreement. Both negotiators [Witkoff and Araghchi] are capable, experienced, moderate, and wise,” he wrote.

Reza Nasri, another political commentator, argued that Iran has strategic reasons to consider negotiating with Trump. “Biden couldn’t deliver due to internal weakness and fear of the anti-Iran lobbies. Obama reached a deal, but Republicans killed it. Ironically, Trump may be the only U.S. president strong enough to defy the establishment, bypass Washington’s foreign policy elite, and strike a deal that actually lasts,” he posted on X.

The Iranian market has responded favorably to the prospect of talks, whether direct or indirect. Tehran’s Stock Exchange (TSE) rose by 59,000 points, reaching 2.8 million, while the rial rebounded slightly from last week’s record low, climbing to around 960,000 per dollar from 1,050,000.