Iran-US talks blow hot and cold: finally on Friday in Oman?

What he says

An English translation of the talk, which is in Persian. It was made with AI from YouTube's automatic captions and may contain errors; the Persian transcript is authoritative. Click a timestamp to jump to that part of the video.

0:01 Hello. It is Wednesday, 15 Bahman 1404, February 4, 2026. First, I apologize for not being able to be with you on Monday. These days, with everything that has happened in Iran and the urgent matters that have come up concerning the lives of young people who are in prison or wounded and being treated in the underground medical network's hospitals and in homes, as well as the emergencies being raised at the international level, I sometimes find I am simply unable to be with you.

0:59 Now, the on-again, off-again negotiations with America have swung back and forth a great deal over the past two or three days, and it was finally announced that on Friday, the day after tomorrow, 17 Bahman, in Muscat, the capital of Oman, Mr. Araghchi, the Islamic Republic's foreign minister, is to negotiate with Mr. Witkoff, Mr. Trump's special envoy, and Kushner, his son-in-law. The day before yesterday, after talking with Turkey, Mr. Araghchi signed off on the negotiations being held in Istanbul with Turkish mediation and in the presence of the foreign ministers of several Islamic countries, such as

1:58 Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and others. But some time later Mr. Araghchi took this back. It is said that the Supreme National Security Council, and some say Khamenei himself, told him this was a mistake, because in that setting, where America wants to talk about the nuclear issue and the proxies, the presence of the foreign ministers of these Islamic countries, all of whom also happen to want an Iran without nuclear weapons, proxies and missiles, would put Iran in the position of being surrounded by countries that share America's position on these matters.

2:52 That is why they changed course and said they would talk with America directly, without other countries present. At first it was reported that America would not accept this and was sticking with Istanbul and the earlier terms, but after a while America agreed. The news outlet Axios, which had first reported that America had given a negative answer on holding the talks in Oman, then reported that no, the answer was now positive and America had agreed, and Mr. Araghchi also wrote on X that the talks would be on Friday. Axios also gave the reason for this change in America's position: nine Islamic countries insistently

3:53 asked Washington to hold the talks, and in effect America gave in because of regional pressure. Although Mr. Marco Rubio, the US Secretary of State, has said that the nuclear issue is not the only subject for discussion, and that missiles and human rights in Iran will also be on the negotiating agenda. In any case, the Islamic Republic has said it will negotiate only on the nuclear issue, and as we speak it is not clear what will ultimately come out of this conference, these negotiations, and whether they will move quickly or drag on. At any rate,

4:49 it is full of ambiguities, and we have to wait and see. But as I said before, on Mr. Trump's desk, besides the three military options that the US military had put at his disposal, having also moved the necessary forces to the region, there were also four political options. One: not to go to war at all, and to negotiate with the Islamic Republic. Two: to go to war, but to cut a deal with someone inside the regime, and it seemed the person most in mind was Mr. Ghalibaf. Three: for America to strike the Iranian regime outright, to wreck it, say, and then bring in an Ahmad Chalabi,

5:46 install him on the throne there, and in effect play at nation-building and state-building, an idea that of course has many opponents in Washington. And the fourth option: for America to recognize that Iran is a complex, pluralistic country, with its various Iranian ethnic groups, diverse political beliefs, diverse religions, and cultural and social diversity; that America should in effect recognize the Iranian Simorgh and help this pluralistic Iranian Simorgh take shape, because this pluralistic model is needed in the stage of struggle, in the stage of consolidating a successor to this regime, and for future democracy.

6:46 In any case, it seems that among the military options Mr. Trump has in effect chosen none, and has for now taken the option of not going to war, and among the political options he has chosen negotiation. In addition, judging by the statements Mr. Rubio made in the US Congress and by others who have spoken, one strand of American thinking is about helping and supporting this pluralism, organization and diversity that exists in Iran, because if the goal is democracy in Iran's future, such a thing is necessary.

7:45 But where these events will lead from here, how they will unfold, and where things will finally come to rest, we come back to what I have told you many times: all foreign powers can be engaged with, but none of them can be relied upon. All foreign powers should and can help and support the struggles of the Iranian people in various ways, but they have no right to interfere in the country's internal affairs. We must always keep the precise difference between the two in mind. Interference by others in Iran's internal affairs is a red line, but asking for help

8:45 and support is something that has existed in every liberation movement, especially appeals to the free world and the great democracies of the world. In transitions to democracy in many countries, in Eastern Europe, in Africa, in Latin America, in the Far East and the subcontinent, freedom fighters have tried to make use of the free world's support: in the press, in technological assistance, diplomatic assistance and other areas. Now, the Fajr Film Festival, which the regime insists on holding after this

9:41 massacre of the people and this crime against humanity, to show that the situation is normal and calm, as well as the other festivals they hold during the Ten Days of Fajr, has this time turned into a separation of the ranks of the people's artists from the regime's artists. These days social media, the media and the press are full of artists, directors and actors who state explicitly: after this massacre, we stand with the people. Even Ali Nasirian, the renowned actor, has protested the use of his photo on the festival poster. Mr. Nasirian, at an advanced age and

10:38 with illness, is mostly housebound, but he asked Mr. Parastui to convey his words, since he himself is not on social media, as did other artists. And of course there were also some who are pro-regime and defend the regime despite these crimes. In any case, this boycott of the regime's Fajr festivals by artists is a way forward and a good guide that can be applied in other arenas as well. Any kind of government ceremony, whether celebrations, mourning observances, religious events or whatever kind you take, can be boycotted; people can simply not go and in this way draw a clear line. The more this boycott and

11:42 non-participation spreads to different areas and different sectors of society, the more united the people's ranks become and the more disordered the regime's ranks become. In hope of victory for Iran and Iranians.