Iran International
Hardliners in Tehran are pushing back against the broader optimism surrounding talks with Washington, insisting that the negotiations are going nowhere and merely dragging on to avoid collapse.
“It is unclear what was discussed over the past month. There is no detail on substance or format, nor any indication of whether an agreement is likely,” Vatan Emrooz wrote in its editorial following the fourth round of talks in Oman last weekend.
“The US’s repeated calls to halt enrichment cast doubt on its seriousness … Perhaps the only objective at this point is to ensure the talks do not collapse,” the editorial added.
While the ultra-conservative daily was more subdued than usual, the message was clear: the process, not the outcome, is what matters.
Kayhan, a hardline paper closely aligned with the Supreme Leader’s office, also struck a defiant tone, giving a rare front-page place to foreign minister Abbas Araghchi who said Tehran will not negotiate enrichment.
Muted optimism, missing details
Other outlets—across both reformist and conservative camps—offered a more coordinated and cautiously positive framing, though still with limited substance. Etemad and Jomhouri Eslami both described the talks as successful but provided no insight into what had actually transpired.
The only notable detail was Etemad’s assertion that the latest round of talks were both direct and indirect, clearly contradicting the official line that the negotiations had been strictly indirect.
Two prominent political commentators, Mohammad Sadeq Javadi-Hesar and Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, acknowledged the information vacuum but urged against equating public messaging with actual policy.
"The outcome of the fourth round of talks has isolated warmongers and opponents of Iran," Javadi-Hesar wrote in Etemad on Monday.
Falahtpisheh went one step further, commenting on US politics. “If both sides have decided to continue negotiations, it means that Steve Witkoff’s statement before the talks, about ending enrichment in Iran, was aimed at silencing opposition within the US.”
A Consortium on the Table?
One potentially significant development came via Khorassan, a conservative daily, which reported that Oman’s Foreign Minister Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi had proposed a regional “nuclear consortium” involving Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the UAE—with the United States as a symbolic shareholder.
Khorasan quoted Witkoff as describing the idea as “a surprise that can be considered.” Such an arrangement, the paper asserted, could address regional security concerns about Iran’s nuclear transparency and dilute fears of its technological monopoly.
Most upbeat was the Reform-aligned daily Sharq, which described the talks in Oman as a new life to diplomacy. And most eloquent, perhaps, was the centrist outlet Ham-Mihan, printing “back to square one” on its front page.
Iran will not accept zero enrichment or transfer of its enriched uranium abroad, the daily wrote in its editorial, unless there is a phased agreement and verifiable US sanctions relief.
