In Iran, cautious optimism meets lingering doubt over US talks

Mohammad Eslami gave no details about the purpose of Grossi’s trip, but the visit comes as Iran continues to restrict the UN watchdog’s access to its nuclear facilities—a limitation in place since 2021. The timing suggests a possible link to the upcoming nuclear negotiations with the United States, set to begin Saturday.

Eslami also underscored what he described as Iran’s nuclear progress, claiming the country has achieved uranium enrichment without any foreign assistance and is the only nation with a fully indigenous nuclear program.

US President Donald Trump on Wednesday reiterated his warning that military action remains on the table if Iran refuses to halt its nuclear activities, adding that Israel would play a leading role in any such operation.

“I’m not asking for much … but they can’t have a nuclear weapon,” Trump told reporters during a press event at the White House, following the signing of several executive orders. He warned that if diplomacy fails, military measures could follow.

“If it requires military, we're going to have military,” he said. “Israel will, obviously, be … the leader of that. No one leads us. We do what we want.”

Trump declined to give a timeline or specific conditions for when military action might occur, saying only, “When you start talks, you know if they’re going along well or not. And I would say the conclusion would be when I think they’re not going along well.”

The comments come just days after Trump made a surprise announcement that direct talks between Washington and Tehran are set to begin Saturday. He warned on Monday that Iran would face “great danger” if negotiations fail to produce a breakthrough on its nuclear program.

The Biden-era nuclear negotiations collapsed in 2022, and since returning to office, Trump has taken a more aggressive stance, demanding that Iran completely abandon its uranium enrichment efforts that have reached an alarming stage, with high levels of uranium enrichment. Tehran has continued to insist on its right to peaceful nuclear development.

The action targets entities linked to the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and its subsidiary, the Iran Centrifuge Technology Company (TESA), both of which play key roles in Iran’s uranium enrichment and nuclear development efforts.

The Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) designated the firms under Executive Order 13382, which aims to curb the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

"The Iranian regime’s reckless pursuit of nuclear weapons remains a grave threat to the United States and a menace to regional stability and global security," said Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. “Treasury will continue to disrupt Iran’s nuclear advances and broader destabilizing agenda.”

Among those sanctioned is Atbin Ista Technical and Engineering Company (AIT), accused of aiding TESA’s acquisition of foreign components. AIT's managing director, Majid Mosallat, was also designated for acting on behalf of the company.

Also blacklisted are Pegah Aluminum Arak Company, which supplies aluminum products to TESA, and Thorium Power Company (TPC), established in 2023 to develop thorium-fueled reactor technologies under the guidance of AEOI.

The designations further include Pars Reactors Construction and Development Company (Satra Pars) and Azarab Industries Co., both of which are involved in AEOI-led nuclear projects, including reactor construction and equipment production.

As a result of the sanctions, all US-linked assets of the designated individuals and entities are frozen, and US persons are generally prohibited from conducting transactions with them. Secondary sanctions may apply to non-US persons engaging in certain activities with the listed entities.

The sanctions come amid heightened nuclear tensions and just days before talks between the United States and Iran are set to take place in Oman on Saturday.

The upcoming negotiations, to be led by Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and US envoy Steve Witkoff, were announced on Monday by President Donald Trump, who has repeatedly threatened Iran with military action if it does not agree to a deal since returning to the White House in January.

“Negotiation, whether direct or indirect, with [Qasem] Soleimani’s killers, those who murdered 50,000 people in Palestine, is not going to end well," warned Fatemeh Tashakori, an ultra-hardliner activist on X, referring to an Iranian commander assassinated in a US drone strike in President Donald Trump's first term.

"The reason: Gaddafi’s fate in Libya!” she added.

As US-Iran talks are set to begin on Saturday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and influential US Senator Tom Cotton in recent days both said Tehran ought to follow the example of Libya and renounce weapons of mass destruction.

Tripoli under veteran strongman Muammar Gaddafi made the move in 2003, only to be toppled in a Western-backed uprising and murdered by armed rebels in 2011.

Another popular ultra-hardliner activist with 22,000 followers, @Ya_Fatemeh, echoed similar sentiments, arguing that Gaddafi complied with US demands—scrapped Libya’s nuclear program, limited missile ranges—and it only brought years of civil war. “Yes, that’s what the Libyan model negotiations are like.”

The Libyan civil war was primarily rooted in internal grievances against Gaddafi’s authoritarian rule, including political repression and corruption.

While the United States and NATO intervened militarily in 2011 to prevent a massacre in Benghazi, they did not start the uprising. The conflict began as part of the broader Arab Spring uprisings, with Libyans taking to the streets demanding change well before any foreign involvement.

Ultra-hardliners who claim to be Khamenei’s most loyal—and only—true followers are well aware that the upcoming talks in Oman would not be happening without his tacit approval.

Though they stop short of naming him directly, the implication is unmistakable—and widely noted on social media. “Shame on you for comparing the Leader of the Revolution with these three people,” hardliner figure Mohammad-Ali Ahangaran, who has nearly 28,000 followers on X, wrote in response to a post that invoked the fates of Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak and Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.

In their opposition to renewed nuclear talks between Tehran and Washington, ultra-hardliners frequently cite Israel’s influence over the Trump administration, particularly its push for the total dismantling of Iran’s uranium enrichment program.

“America and Israel’s Main Strategy Against Iran: Libyazation of Iran,” read the headline of a Raja News article—the outlet affiliated with supporters of former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili an ultra-hardliner ideologue.

The piece referenced statements by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US Senators Tom Cotton and Lindsey Graham advocating the use of the "Libyan model" in dealing with Iran’s nuclear program.

While Israeli media reported that Netanyahu discussed the Libyan model during his recent visit to Washington, the US stance remains ambiguous, as Trump gave no firm indication on whether he would adopt the model.

Ultra-hardliners recently warned that the Islamic Republic was risking alienation of its staunchest supporters, who they said make up the “solid core of the system”, if authorities continued suspending strict hijab enforcement.

Often referred to as “super-revolutionaries” by rival conservatives, most ultra-hardliners have strong links to the Paydari (Steadfastness) Party and a group known as MASAF. The two parties form the majority in the Parliament.

Last week, Iran’s Press Supervisory Board issued a rare warning to Kayhan newspaper, a leading ultra-hardline publication, after it published an article interpreted as a threat to assassinate Trump over the 2020 killing of Soleimani. The paper later claimed the piece was satirical.

Officials have made clear that tolerance for dissent against the talks, even from the far right, will depend on the outcome of negotiations—and the Supreme Leader’s position.

Some hardline publications appear to be adjusting their tone. An editorial by Gholamreza Sadeghian, chief editor of the Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) linked Javan newspaper, for instance, said on Wednesday that Iran may agree to reduce its enrichment levels but warned that this should not be viewed as a concession.

In return for reduced enrichment and increased inspections by the UN nuclear watchdog, IAEA, Iran should demand full sanctions relief and an end to Western support for the Islamic Republic’s opposition, the editorial argued.

“We do not want a nuclear bomb and never have,” President Masoud Pezeshkian said at a ceremony in Tehran. “We seek peace, security and dialogue — but dialogue rooted in dignity and independence. We will not retreat from our scientific and technological achievements.”

The president spoke at an exhibition of nuclear developments, where he inaugurated several new projects. He criticized Western powers for what he called leading the world into “war and destruction under the banner of civilization and peace,” and insisted Iran would not allow others to dictate its path.

Atomic Energy Organization head Mohammad Eslami said Iran was entering a new phase of nuclear development, including the production of medical radioisotopes and advancements in agriculture and power generation.

“Despite all threats and sabotage, our scientists are moving forward stronger than ever,” Eslami said.

In a separate statement, the Iranian parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Commission warned that “any threat to the peaceful nuclear industry will face a serious, decisive and destructive response.” The statement reiterated Iran’s right to nuclear technology under the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

The comments come as Iranian and US negotiators prepare to meet Saturday in Oman for indirect talks focused on Iran’s nuclear program and potential sanctions relief. Tehran has signaled openness to diplomacy but remains wary of US intentions.

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has said the talks are “a new opportunity for diplomacy” and the sole focus will be confirming the peaceful nature of Iran’s program in exchange for lifting what he called “cruel sanctions.”

The upcoming talks have drawn attention amid rising regional tensions and diverging views in Washington and Tehran on the path forward.

Iran's nuclear program has advanced to a stage where it could potentially enrich sufficient uranium for several nuclear fission weapons within weeks.

Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile remains under monitoring and verification by the UN’s nuclear watchdog, but the agency has no longer daily access to the Natanz and Fordow enrichment facilities.

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.”