By Ahmad Rafat
The fifth round of negotiations between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States over Tehran’s nuclear program took place on May 23 at the Omani ambassador’s residence in Rome.
The discussions, which lasted approximately three hours, concluded as they had in the previous four rounds — with no significant progress or agreement.
While Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi described the talks as “professional,” other Iranian officials expressed dissatisfaction with the absence of a deal that would meet Tehran’s terms.
Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump remains inexplicably optimistic, promising “good news” soon.
Although the representatives of Iran and the U.S. sat down for negotiations with Oman mediating, it is important to recognize that at least two other countries are also involved in these discussions, and their perspectives cannot be overlooked: Israel and Russia.
While Russia remains mainly in the background, Israel plays a more visible role.
In Rome, for example, David Barnea, the head of Mossad (Israel’s intelligence agency), and Ron Dermer, Israel’s Minister of Strategic Affairs, were in the city, meeting with Steve Witkoff, U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East and the head of the American delegation, both before and after the talks.
Meanwhile, before negotiations started, Iranian negotiator Araghchi met with Oman’s Foreign Minister, Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi, at the Iranian ambassador’s residence in Rome, less than 100 meters from the venue of the talks.
Right after the latest round of talks concluded, Trump quickly dispatched his Secretary of Homeland Security, Kristi Noem, to Israel to discuss with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the proposals that the Omani mediator reportedly had presented in Rome.
Sources say at least two proposals were on the table.
The first, which was rejected by both the U.S. delegation and Iran, suggested a temporary halt to uranium enrichment without dismantling any enrichment facilities or centrifuges. The second proposal called for the formation of a joint enrichment consortium involving Saudi Arabia and the UAE.
However, Iran’s stance remained firm: any deal had to allow it to keep its enrichment facilities on its soil.
After Israel opposed both proposals, the U.S. ultimately rejected them as well.
Many observers saw Witkoff’s sudden exit from the talks as a sign that the negotiations were deadlocked.
Despite five rounds of discussions, the talks have effectively faltered. Yet neither side seems willing to take the blame for calling it quits – especially not Trump, who desperately needs a win in international diplomacy after failing to broker a ceasefire in Ukraine and the end of the Gaza conflict.
The fifth round of Tehran-Washington talks occurred amid reports from Israeli media that the Israeli military was ready to strike Iran’s nuclear facilities.
Iranian military officials issued a warning on May 23, stressing their preparedness to retaliate strongly against any attacks targeting Iran’s nuclear, military, or economic infrastructure.
Within the Islamic Republic, there is a prevailing sense of confidence that Trump’s reluctance to engage in military action in the Middle East benefits them.
The recent removal of Mike Waltz as National Security Advisor has only reinforced this belief. Waltz had been a staunch advocate for a hardline stance against Iran and viewed negotiations with Tehran as pointless.
The think tanks of the Islamic Republic argue that considering the current circumstances, any potential Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear or military facilities would likely be limited.
They point to several factors: the ongoing and intensifying conflict in Gaza, the volatile situation in Syria, the presence of forces hostile to any agreement with Israel near the Golan Heights, ongoing missile attacks by Yemeni Houthis, and tensions with the U.S. President.
Given these challenges, they believe Israel cannot plan or execute large-scale attacks on Iran.
Iran also relies on regional nations’ opposition, especially the Gulf states, to deter military action.
Many of these countries, which host U.S. military bases, believe that, given Iran’s struggles in directly retaliating against Israel, Tehran may seek revenge through its remaining proxy forces.
If military retaliation is off the table, there is concern that Iran could resort to terrorist activities on their soil, posing a direct threat to their security.
In Tehran, it is thought that countries like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Qatar, with their close ties to Trump, will wield a considerable influence over the situation.
Tehran Pushes for Saudi Arabia to Release Iranian Cleric Who Posted Critical Video
