In the midst of an increasing risk of military conflict in the Middle East, renewed talks between the United States and Iran offer a small but important window to avoid escalation. On 6 February 2026, senior representatives of the United States and Iran were set to meet for diplomatic talks in Istanbul; however, the meeting was later relocated, and the two sides ultimately convened in Muscat. The discussions were aimed at restarting nuclear negotiations and reducing the risks of escalation.
The thin line between negotiations and confrontation represents the deep tensions in US-Iran relations. Both parties appear aware that armed conflict would carry severe consequences, yet each faces entrenched domestic and regional pressures that could easily undermine diplomatic efforts before they gain momentum.
From Nuclear Confrontation to Diplomatic Engagement
In the past few months, tensions have been brewing following the collapse of previous negotiations and a strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities by US forces in June 2025. These actions heightened tensions and intensified mistrust on both sides. The central issue between Iran and the United States is Iran’s nuclear programme, particularly its enriched uranium stockpile and its missile advancement programme. Washington wants Iran to limit uranium enrichment and be more transparent about its nuclear activities. Meanwhile, Tehran stresses its sovereign right to peaceful nuclear energy and calls for sanctions to be eased as provided under Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
President Donald Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian have both resorted to threats but have been amenable to diplomatic initiatives. Trump warned that failure in negotiations could lead to “bad things.” But Iran has indicated its willingness to negotiate, emphasising the necessity of a threat-free environment. Furthermore, Tehran stresses that the primary focus must remain on nuclear policy and the management of its nuclear program.
The talks, between US envoy Steve Witkoff and Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, represent the strongest diplomatic effort in months. Regional powers like Pakistan, Türkiye, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt are trying to mediate between the US and Iran because a wider conflict would directly threaten their security, economies, trade routes, and energy supplies. They are pushing for de-escalation to protect their national interests and prevent instability from spreading across the region.
The renewed push for diplomacy reflects the interest of both the US and Iran to negotiate a solution. Washington wants to limit Tehran’s nuclear progress and protect its regional allies, especially Isreal while avoiding a direct war. At the same time, Iran’s development of nuclear technology is a sovereign right under Article IV of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). Washington pressures Tehran because it is the only regional power that can seriously challenge Israel. Washington has sent an aircraft carrier to the Gulf and imposed tougher sanctions on Tehran’s nuclear, missile, and regional programs, despite Tehran’s right to develop nuclear technology. However, these actions raise tensions and increase the risk of miscalculation in an already unstable region, making balanced dialogue more important than escalation.
The Iranian leadership is ready for constructive talks with the US and other countries, as long as negotiations are based on mutual respect, dignity, and real economic benefits, without threats or ultimatums. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has emphasized that Iran seeks serious and fair discussions while protecting its national interests. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has warned that any military action would have serious consequences for the region, highlighting that a cooperative and respectful approach is the best way to achieve peace and stability in the Middle East.
Regional Risks and Escalation Beyond Borders
The risk of escalation is tangible. Iran’s military capabilities, including its ballistic missiles and alleged regional proxy networks, suggest that any confrontation with the United States could rapidly extend to multiple fronts. Iran has declared that any strike on its territory could prompt immediate retaliation against US bases, including both American forces and allied troops hosting them. However, during the June 2025 conflict, it held back and warned the US before striking a US base in Qatar, preventing the situation from getting out of control.
Regional states, especially those in the Gulf, are deeply concerned about the consequences of conflict. Members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and neighbouring countries, many of which host US military bases, have called for restraint. They fear that a war could destabilise fragile economies and disrupt global energy markets.
The international energy market is already responding to the current diplomatic developments in the region. Earlier fears of conflict had pushed oil prices up, but they fell sharply after news of serious talks, showing that investors see a chance for tensions to ease.
Challenges to Sustainable Diplomacy
Although negotiations are in progress, achieving substantial progress remains challenging.
The profound distrust between Tehran and Washington, developed over decades, cannot be resolved quickly. Iran holds longstanding grievances, notably the US withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear agreement (JCPOA) and the reimposition of sanctions that have severely damaged its economy. Meanwhile, the United States and its partners continue to question Tehran’s intentions.
Significant structural constraints remain in US-Iran talks. Tehran has made clear that negotiations should be limited to nuclear matters, rejecting US attempts to link discussions to its missile programme, regional policies, or support for allies. By contrast, the US under Trump’s approach has emphasised four key demands: stop Iran’s nuclear programme, halt uranium enrichment, limit missile development, and end support for regional partners, while ignoring Tehran’s sovereign rights and legitimate security concerns in the broader context.
What’s Next?
Despite the challenges, the start of negotiations after months of tension and military posturing is inherently meaningful. Diplomacy may not ensure peace, but it establishes a framework for managing risk and identifying shared interests. For now, the world waits to see if Muscat, Oman, will mark significant progress or just a brief pause. A second round of talks are now selected to take place in Geneva. In a world where miscommunication and mistrust can trigger uncontrollable conflict, negotiation should be seen not as weakness but as a necessary tool. Both the US and Iran need to understand that even a limited agreement could prevent a huge regional war that neither side wants. While the outcome of the diplomatic engagement is uncertain, it provides the only viable framework for stability against the threat of war.
This article was published in another form at https://cscr.pk/explore/themes/defense-security/can-diplomacy-prevent-a-us-war-against-iran/
Shahwana Binte Sohail is is Research Assistant at the Centre for International Strategic Studies Islamabad.
