A turning point in the Middle East: What the US-Iran talks in Oman could unleash?
Shafaq News/ The high-stakes nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran, currently underway in Muscat, Oman, are unfolding under the dense shadow of escalating regional instability. As the first major dialogue of its kind since the US withdrawal from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, these talks hold the potential to either defuse or intensify one of the world’s most volatile geopolitical landscapes.
At the heart of the matter is not only Iran’s nuclear program but the wider architecture of its regional alliances—namely Hezbollah in Lebanon, the Islamic Resistance in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and armed groups in Gaza—all of which are tethered to Tehran’s strategic calculus.
The Strategic Stakes
At the core of the talks is Washington’s enduring goal: to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. US envoy Steve Witkoff and his team, including experts from the National Security Council and State Department, are tasked with steering these delicate negotiations while maintaining pressure on Iran to dismantle enrichment activities currently reaching near-weapons-grade levels.
Iran, for its part, is signaling an openness to serious diplomacy. Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, with the full backing of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, has been empowered to pursue a "genuine and fair" deal. However, Tehran also enters these talks amid severe regional strain—military setbacks, economic pressure, and the unraveling of its sphere of influence in Syria and Gaza.
This fragile context heightens the importance of the talks. A breakthrough could redirect the regional trajectory toward de-escalation, while failure may lead to open conflict, especially in light of the increasingly bellicose rhetoric from both sides. US President Donald Trump’s threats of “hell” for Iran if negotiations collapse underscore just how precarious the diplomatic path is.
Hezbollah: From Deterrent to Diplomatic Pawn?
Nowhere is the impact of these negotiations more tangible than in Lebanon. Hezbollah, long considered Iran’s crown jewel in the “Axis of Resistance,” has endured serious setbacks over the past year. The conflict that erupted in late 2024 between Hezbollah and Israel marked a turning point. Israeli forces not only inflicted heavy casualties—killing around 4,000 people and wounding over 16,000—but also demonstrated a sophisticated intelligence and cyberwarfare campaign, most notably through Operation Grim Beeper, which weaponized pagers and walkie-talkies.
In strategic terms, Hezbollah’s capability to strike Tel Aviv and even reach the Israeli Prime Minister’s residence was a show of resilience. However, the loss of top leaders, including Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah, dealt a psychological and operational blow. The ambiguity surrounding the group’s current intentions—whether it is merely regrouping or intentionally avoiding escalation—suggests a weakened but still potent force.
If the Oman talks lead to a détente, Hezbollah might pivot toward political engagement within Lebanon, possibly reducing its military footprint temporarily under US and regional pressure.
“If Tehran finds itself without gains in these talks Hezbollah could provoke to reignite hostilities, especially if Israel maintains its aggressive posture. The group's fate, therefore, is tightly interwoven with the success or failure of these negotiations.” A military expert told Shafaq News Agency in condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Just as Hezbollah’s trajectory is increasingly linked to the talks in Muscat, so too is the future of Iran’s allies in Iraq, where the conversation shifts from deterrence to institutional integration.
Iraq’s Resistance: Between Integration and Insurgency
Iran-backed Shiite forces in Iraq have long been a pivotal force in the country’s security equation, operating both independently and within the framework of the Popular Mobilization Forces (PMF). As US-Iran negotiations unfold in Muscat, the implications for these groups are significant and multifaceted.
A successful diplomatic breakthrough could prompt a recalibration of Iran’s influence in Iraq, particularly concerning the role and autonomy of the PMF. In recent months, Iraqi political discourse—under apparent encouragement from Washington—has increasingly tilted toward integrating all military forces under the control of the official Iraqi army. “This would potentially involve dissolving or restructuring the PMF, aligning with American demands for a unified and centralized command structure,” the expert said.
US officials have repeatedly called for the dissolution of armed non-state actors in Iraq, a position mirrored in Lebanon regarding Hezbollah.
The Iraqi government has shown signs of cautiously supporting such reforms, emphasizing national sovereignty and military unity. Discussions within the Shiite Coordination Framework, which enjoys strong ties with Tehran, have leaned toward reinforcing the role of the official military while maintaining a balanced approach that avoids provoking Tehran or alienating domestic constituencies. This bloc, along with several Iran-aligned factions, has largely supported the government's neutral position in regional conflicts, including the Gaza war, and has shown restraint in military rhetoric. Many groups halted their attacks on US bases after October 2023, signaling an internal shift toward de-escalation and political pragmatism.
Iran, for its part, has adopted a notably diplomatic posture on this sensitive issue. Tehran has consistently underscored the strategic importance of the PMF in preserving Iraq’s security and resisting foreign intervention. However, it has also signaled flexibility, expressing support for the Iraqi government's authority—particularly the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces—as the legitimate overseer of all national military formations.
“This nuanced stance suggests that while Iran is keen to preserve the influence it wields through the PMF, it may be open to compromise, provided its interests and regional deterrence strategies are not fundamentally undermined,” the expert explained.
In the context of the Oman talks, “the fate of these military groups under the umbrella of Islamic Resistance in Iraq could become a barometer of how far both Washington and Tehran are willing to go to reset the terms of their regional engagement.”
Should diplomacy progress, a phased integration of the PMF into the national armed forces under a unified command may emerge as a key concession—serving US goals of military centralization while allowing Iran to preserve a measure of influence through political channels rather than paramilitary ones. On the other hand, if negotiations falter, these groups may feel emboldened to reassert themselves militarily, risking a resurgence of instability not only in Iraq but across the wider region.
The Houthis: Iran’s Most Active Ally
Among Iran’s allies, the Houthis (Ansarallah) in Yemen remain the most operationally aggressive. While Iran maintains that the Houthis are an independent movement, their sustained attacks on Red Sea shipping lanes and strikes on Israeli and US interests suggest deep ideological and logistical alignment.
“The Houthis’ ability to continue these operations despite Israeli airstrikes and American retaliatory measures highlights their resilience and the strategic importance they hold for Iran,” the expert explained, adding that “in contrast to Hezbollah or the Iraqi militias, the Houthis are not dialing back their confrontational posture. Their actions provide Tehran with a low-cost but high-impact means to pressure adversaries and influence negotiations.”
Should the Muscat talks yield a diplomatic path forward, Tehran might be persuaded—perhaps through incentives or sanctions relief—to scale back support for the Houthis. However, any agreement will likely stop short of full disarmament or disengagement, given the Houthis’ utility in maintaining Iranian influence on a critical geopolitical front.
Israel and the Unyielding Threat Perception
According to the expert, a critical wildcard in this diplomatic puzzle is Israel. For Tel Aviv, Iran’s nuclear ambitions remain an existential threat. Israeli officials have made clear that if diplomacy fails, military options will remain on the table. This stance, while not new, gains traction in the wake of Israel's “successes” against Hezbollah and its close coordination with Washington.
“If the US-Iran talks succeed, Israel may be compelled to recalibrate its security doctrine, perhaps accepting a de facto Iranian nuclear threshold in exchange for regional de-escalation," he pointed out, suggesting that any hint that Iran retains breakout capability could spur unilateral Israeli action, reigniting conflict with Hezbollah or even triggering a broader regional war.
Diplomatic Channels and the Role of Oman
Oman’s role as host and facilitator is not coincidental. Historically neutral and trusted by both Tehran and Washington, Muscat provides a discreet venue conducive to quiet diplomacy. This environment may allow both sides to explore off-ramps, confidence-building measures, and phased concessions.
Importantly, the talks in Oman are not happening in a vacuum. They come at a time when multiple regional conflicts—Syria’s implosion, Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, and cross-border Lebanese-Israeli skirmishes—are converging. These overlapping crises amplify the urgency and complexity of reaching a deal.
The expert concluded that the outcomes of the Oman talks could unfold along two primary trajectories:
1. Diplomatic Breakthrough: If both parties manage to bridge their gaps, we could see a gradual reduction in hostilities. Iran might agree to cap enrichment levels, accept enhanced inspections, or commit to regional de-escalation. In return, limited sanctions relief could be offered, and Tehran’s influence in Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen might become more regulated if not entirely restrained.
2. Breakdown and Escalation: A failure to reach a consensus could have cascading effects. Iran might resume high-level enrichment, the US could tighten sanctions or consider military action, and Tehran's allies—particularly Hezbollah and the Houthis—could escalate attacks. In this scenario, the Middle East would inch closer to a multi-front conflict with devastating consequences.
