Indirect talks with the US could be Tehran's attempt to buy time

Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi’s suggestion on Thursday about pursuing indirect talks with the United States may signal a sudden shift in Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s previously uncompromising stance on negotiations.

This apparent change came shortly after Tehran acknowledged receiving a letter from President Donald Trump, which reportedly outlined the terms of a possible agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and, potentially, other issues, including Tehran’s regional proxies.

As these developments gain momentum, many seem to have overlooked Iran’s scheduled participation in trilateral negotiations with Russia and China in Beijing on Friday. Meanwhile, Russia’s offer to mediate between Tehran and Washington remains on the table, with neither side having rejected it thus far.

Araghchi’s suggestion that indirect negotiations would be a “natural solution” for reaching a deal with Washington may also indicate that Iran is aiming to buy time. The strategy could be to push past the October deadline for the reactivation of the UN trigger mechanism, which would reinstate all previous international sanctions against Iran. Additionally, Iran may be looking ahead to the 2028 US election, hoping to outlast the Trump administration, with which it remains reluctant to engage in direct talks.

Araghchi’s suggestion of Oman as a possible mediator may lead observers to overlook why Qatar, the UAE, and possibly Russia have been sidelined as potential mediators—and why Tehran is now proposing indirect talks in Muscat.

Qatar’s leaders may already be preoccupied with issues related to Gaza, Syria, and Afghanistan, leaving little capacity to take on another complex diplomatic challenge. At the same time, Iran’s handling of Qatar’s recent mediation efforts suggests a degree of distrust. When the Qatari emir delivered a message to Tehran earlier this month, Khamenei largely dismissed it, instead questioning why Qatar has not released Iran’s oil revenues from South Korea frozen in Doha under a US arrangement.

Meanwhile, Iran is unlikely to trust the UAE as a diplomatic intermediary, given its close alliance with Saudi Arabia and the ongoing territorial dispute over three islands in the Persian Gulf.

Furthermore, many politicians in Tehran, including Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, the former head of the parliament's Foreign Policy and National Security Committee, as well as several centrist and conservative newspapers such as Jomhouri Eslami, have repeatedly questioned Moscow's goodwill as a mediator. They argue that Russia is primarily focused on its own interests rather than genuinely helping Iran navigate a major foreign policy and economic crisis.

Notably, Nour News, a media outlet close to Iran’s Supreme Council of National Security, revealed that Russia refused to deliver Trump's message to Tehran, reportedly objecting to its content. Instead, Moscow passed the task on to the UAE.

At the same time, Iranian officials see indirect negotiations as an effective way to buy time and wait for a more favorable international climate. With the Iranian delegation in one room and US representatives in another, and Omani mediators shuttling messages between them, the process could stretch on for months, if not years. Meanwhile, shifting developments and ad-hoc decisions in Tehran and Washington could continuously delay and extend the talks.

Iranian media have made it clear over the past week that China and Russia have little interest in finalizing a deal between Tehran and Washington. Meanwhile, the low level of officials participating in the upcoming talks further diminishes any hope for a breakthrough.

Instead of sending a senior negotiator like career diplomat Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran is dispatching Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi to Beijing—a lower-profile figure with less influence to advance the discussions.

Whether Iran can navigate multiple diplomatic channels to buy time remains uncertain. Its ability to do so depends on whether it can manage the country’s worsening economic crisis, stave off a major socio-political upheaval, and counter the growing pressure from European countries, some of which have signaled their intent to activate the UN trigger mechanism—all while the clock continues to run out.