In a notable development, negotiations have begun between the Tehran regime and the United States amid unprecedented internal and external crises threatening the survival of the Iranian regime. The regime is suffering from a collapsing economy, a society seething with anger, diplomatic isolation, and a loss of legitimacy, alongside the rise of organized resistance led by "hotbeds of rebellion" within the country. These conditions raise urgent questions: Why has Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who previously refused to negotiate with Washington and described it as "treason," decided to return to the negotiating table? What risks and opportunities do these negotiations hold for the regime and the Iranian people?

Retreat Under Pressure

For years, Khamenei has adhered to the slogan "No negotiations, no surrender," attempting to project an image of a leader defying the West. However, the successive crises have forced him to change his stance. The Iranian economy is suffering from inflation and currency collapse, while society is in a revolutionary state, with recurring popular protests threatening the foundations of the regime. In his speech marking Eid al-Fitr in 2025, Khamenei hinted that popular uprising is the greatest danger he faces. This fear has driven the regime to negotiations, not out of confidence but from a standpoint of desperation and the need to buy time.

This shift has revealed the regime's weakness; its image as an invincible force has collapsed, and Khamenei has faced criticism even from his close supporters. Negotiations, once described by him as "unjust," have now become a tool to alleviate economic and political pressures, but the question remains: Will this step achieve the regime's goals, or will it complicate matters further?

To analyze these negotiations, it is essential to understand the key points governing them:

1. The Regime's Survival is an Absolute Priority:For Khamenei, maintaining the regime is the primary objective. He is willing to make tactical concessions if they ensure the regime's longevity, even if temporary.

2. The Nuclear Program as a Strategic Asset: The regime has no intention of abandoning its nuclear ambitions. Negotiations, as demonstrated by the experience of the 2015 nuclear agreement, are a means to ease sanctions and buy time without making substantial changes to its policies.

3. America's Stance is Firm: Washington aims to dismantle the Iranian nuclear program permanently. President Donald Trump stated on April 15, 2025: "Iran will not have a nuclear weapon, and we will act firmly if necessary."

4. Contradictory Goals: The demands of both parties are completely contradictory. The regime seeks to maintain its nuclear program while easing sanctions, while the U.S. demands a radical solution that guarantees the dismantling of Tehran's nuclear capabilities.

Time is Short

The regime faces a limited timeframe, as the nuclear agreement will expire in two to six months. Trump's statements indicate Washington's refusal to tolerate delays. On April 15, he said, "We set another deadline for next week, and that is enough time. It seems they are trying to stall." This places the regime in a precarious position, having to make a swift decision between conceding or facing international escalation.

The possibilities that these negotiations could lead to are varied, but all carry significant challenges:

1. A Temporary Agreement: The regime accepts reducing its enrichment to 2015 levels with international oversight in exchange for easing sanctions, such as releasing frozen funds. However, this option may not satisfy Washington, which demands a permanent solution.

2. Failure of Negotiations: If both parties stick to their positions, negotiations may collapse, leading to new sanctions, activation of the "snapback" mechanism, or even military threats.

3. A Comprehensive Settlement:Complete dismantling of the nuclear program, which the regime views as "political suicide," as it would ignite internal protests.

4. Stalling: Attempting to prolong negotiations without concessions, but this option is unsustainable under international pressures.

An Uncertain Future

The current negotiations have revealed the depth of the crisis the regime is experiencing. Whether they reach a conclusion or not, they have reinforced internal divisions and showcased the fragility of leadership. Every option facing the regime carries serious repercussions: conceding could ignite an uprising, while escalation could expose it to sanctions or military intervention. In the end, negotiations appear to be just a temporary stop in a larger trajectory.

Iran today is entering a critical phase. The transformations over recent years, from popular protests to organized resistance, indicate that the fate of the regime will not be determined at negotiating tables, but rather in the streets of Tehran and other Iranian cities. The power of the people, supported by "hotbeds of rebellion" and organized resistance, will shape the future, regardless of the outcomes of these negotiations.

Hasan Mahmoudi