in a surprising reversal, the trump administration, which had withdrawn from the 2015 nuclear accord in 2018, is now actively negotiating a new agreement with tehran. after years of breathing fire around iran's peaceful nuclear program, why now of all times, does the us suddenly need a deal? in this episode,

bron today will analyze the main drivers of this turnaround from donald trump's personal and political motivations to regional alliance shifts and beyond. stay tuned for more. donald trump's decision to revive talks with iran is first and foremost shaped both by his political agenda and his negotiating style. domestically, americans of all stripes appear to favor a diplomatic solution. a may 2025, university of maryland poll found nearly seven in 10 voters preferred a negotiated agreement with iran over its nuclear program.

program while only 14% backed military action. support for talks cuts across party lines. 64 of republicans along with 78% of democrats preferred negotiation over war. this broad public sentiment likely encourages trump who faces scrutiny over foreign policy. cutting a deal could bolster his image as a dealmaker and avert criticism from those who now fear endless wars in

one area where he believes he can claim the nobel prize is in resolving the iran nuclear issue. personally, he is very interested in this. another important point is that the us currently has no other options. they cannot accept iran increasing its uranium enrichment, even under the npt framework, and on the other hand, they cannot attack iran. trump himself has stated that the wars after september 11th cost the us around $7 trillion dollars. "and the result of the iraq war was in his view, iran gaining influence over iraq. at the same time, trump's social bases strongly opposed to war, arguing that these funds should be used to solve domestic problems. he needs the support of this group for the 2026 elections. a year from now are the midterms, and if the republicans lose, there is a risk they could be defeated in the 2028 presidential election.

by the looks of things, trump's language has also softened compared to earlier years. in riad, he said, "i don't like permanent enemies, expressly inviting iran to make a deal. by framing negotiations as offering a new path, he seemingly shifts from the heartline rhetoric of his first term to a more transactional approach. finally, there may be a personal ego element. trump prides himself on dealmaking.

in contrast, mr. arakchi maintained that the negotiations would be indirect, and ultimately iran's stance proved to be correct, that is, the us relented. the location of the talk. in oman also aligned with iran's position and the us accepted it. these subtle points reveal which side is more urgently in need of an agreement. trump who previously undermined the nuclear deal, now insists on reaching an agreement with iran sooner. from mike pompeo's letter, which laid out numerous conditions for iran, the dynamic has shifted. sometimes they say iran can enrich uranium, other times, possibly under israel influence. they insist iran must not, and then later they agree with the enrichment again. however, the previously aggressive bullying tone seen in us diplomacy, has largely disappeared. iran, as always, has reaffirmed its right to enrich uranium, and has maintained its stens. it's clear who is in more urgent need of

reaching an agreement. it's not a difficult conclusion to reach. the reality, however, is that the us president has learned the... hardway, you cannot break the iranian nation's resolve to pursue its peaceful nuclear program through force or coersion. back in 2015, iran and six world powers, that is p5 plus one, sealed the joint comprehensive plan of action with great fan fair. iran agreed to dismantle almost much of its nuclear program and accept unprecedented inspections in exchange for sanctions relief. the deal took effect. in january 2016, capping iran's enrichment, but just three years later trump tour it up, reimpose sanctions on tehran under what he called maximum pressure campaign, but it all backfired. far from folding under pressure, iran enriched uranium to 60%

purity at two sites. breakout time, which obama era negotiators had stretched to over a year, fell back to months. iran even restarted advance cent were not achieved, what did they want from this approach? primarily, they aim to change iran's stance on the nuclear issue, secondarily, to influence iran's missile defense capabilities, and thirdly, to impact regional issues, none of which happened. iran began to sideline and take out its first

generation outdated centrifuges. it increased its uranium stock piles gradually to the point where now it has developed advanced centrifuges and built very... important facilities, the issue isn't only nuclear, iran also possesses advanced missile systems and drones and it has demonstrated that the policy of maximum pressure has had the opposite effect for the americans, not only has it failed to weaken iran, but in fact it has strengthen iran in various ways, but what choice does washington really have? china, russia, the europeans, even skeptical republicans in the congress. recognize the reality that iran's nuclear know-how is not going away. in retrospect, many point to an obvious truth, what donald trump did was political gambling on untested assumptions. beyond trump himself, long-term us strategic

interests have also shifted. the west asia region today is very different from 2018 or 2015. a decade ago, arab states under the influence of the west sponsored irano. be a project united with israel against tehran, but now things have changed dramatically. saudi arabia and the uae, previously implacably opposed to any iran deal, have begun to see a nuclear agreement as a stabilizing force. both countries have publicly expressed support for a us-iran accord on terms they find acceptable in hopes of reducing tensions and insulating themselves from conflict. just recently, saudi arabia. has king salman sent his defense minister to tehran reportedly with this blunt message, take the offer seriously to avoid war with israel. during the same visit, saudi leaders warned they would not support any foreign attack on iran's nuclear sites, a sign they want to stay out of conflict. these diplomatic

overtures from riyad and other persian gulf capitals signal that america's traditional allies in the region now see a negotiated settlement as in original countries, particularly saudi arabia, had little interest in seeing the talk succeed, we even saw that the saudi foreign minister would fly to europe attempting to lobby and disrupt the negotiation process. at one point, a saudi prince said, i will bring chaos and unrest to the streets of tehran, however, after incidents like the attack on aramco and similar events, the leader of persian gulf countries clearly realized that. security is a collective good, brothers, whether you're in saudi arabia, the uae, qatar or tehran, security is not

exclusive to one country, it's not the case that tensions can be contained within a country's borders, if a war against iran were to occur, its consequences would impact the entire region and possibly the world. that's why this time, instead of obstructing saudi arabia through its defense minister, the brother of the crown prince, sends a representative to tehran. the aim is to encourage iran to move towards an agreement with the us, because security and consequently economic prosperity is a collective good. for the us, a peaceful resolution serves multiple aims. first, it lowers the risk of war that could drag in american forces. any conflict with iran would endanger persian gulf shipping, impacting global oil prices and could spread to places like

was truly a significant setback for the americans in a military sense, according to the pentagon, around 1100 air strikes were conducted, while according to yamanzana law, approximately 1,700 strikes took place, yet no tangible achievements resulted. i recall that the americans claimed the purpose of this assault was to open the barbal mandep straight for ships heading to the occupied territory. they also intended to weaken anoral law to help their attacks

on airports and military centers of the zionist regime, but this did not happen. the americans spent billions of dollars losing at least two aircraft and around eight of their expensive drones. we possess footage showing missiles hitting us warships, especially the aircraft carrier, uss, truman, which is heavily damaged and... turn to the us for major repairs, the americans realized they could not achieve the desired outcome, back in march, when the us began its operations against ansaro law, they stated it was a message to the islamic republic, they used the latest model of bunker busting bombs against antoral to test their effectiveness before any potential attack on iran, however they failed against yemani forces. ultimately signing a ceasefire agreement with ansara, clearly,

under such circumstances they prefer this an attack on iran be the last resort. meanwhile, global geopolitics and timing favor talks. the war in ukraine has tied up us and european attention, an unintended consequence of that conflict was that iran drifted outside the international spotlight, but by 2025. western leaders are once again focusing on the nuclear file. in fact, analysts note that coming up fast is the jcpo snapback deadline. by october 2025, the un original parties can reinstate all previous sanctions on iran. rather than let that happen and push iran further away, the us seems to be seasing this narrow window to write a new agreement. engaging now could preempt harsher measures later. avoid another deadlock, if negotiations stall, the international atomic energy agency may issue an official

condemnation of iran as soon as this month. such a move could enable france and the uk to activate the snapback mechanism, reimposing united nations security council sanctions. iran has issued threats to withdraw from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty if that occurs, raising fears of a broader international crisis. experts warned that this could end inspections, accelerate iran's nuclear enrichment and significantly increase the risk of a military conflict with the united states, and in case of any serious confrontation. president trump would face the real costs and political fallout of a war, conflict that neither he, his supporters nor his persian gulf allies want. while trump has repeatedly stated that conflict would be disastrous for iran, analys warn it would be equally, if not more damaging for the u.s. and stability in the west asia region. برای منطقه که قطعاً. as for the region, war

is undoubtably not a desirable thing, although... extensive economic investments and international agreements would suffer severe damage. investment security would drastically decline and many countries would be unwilling to invest in a conflict-ridden region. even us investors who currently hold the largest investments in the region do not want the area to plunge into war. moreover, regional insecurity causes oil and fuel prices to rise. with can seriously harm the global economy and hinder worldwide economic growth. generally, rising all prices are associated with a slowdown in economic growth in developed countries. the greatest harm is often felt by the americans themselves. you know that increasing petrol prices significantly impacts us

economic growth. one of trump's key efforts has been to remove. mental restrictions related to oil extraction to boost and sustain oil production. this is all aimed that preventing the final cost of oil and fuel from rising too much, thereby avoiding further turbulence in the us economy. we have a lot more to cover today, but first let's take a moment to catch up on the latest headlines. hello everyone, welcome to the new section of this. program here, we'll go over some important news headlines. tehran times: this guy has no will for a deal, despite five rounds of indirect and nuclear negotiations, us president donald trump seems less interested in diplomacy with iran and more investing in keeping tensions alive. his latest threats paired with fresh sanctions and zero sum demands suggests that he currently isn't looking for a deal. speaking to

reporters of broad air force one on friday, trump once again took a hardline stance on iran's nuclear program. "if they enrich, then we're going to have to do it the other way, and i don't really want to do it the other way," he said, adding, this is not going to be enrichment of uranium in iran. he didn't explain what the other way meant, leaving his statement open to interpretation, possibly as a veiled threat of military action. trump's dismissal of even basic enrichment rights, something iran deems nonnegotiable, indicates a lack of desire to reach a consensus. instead of promoting conversation, these remarks generate. skepticism and indicate to tehran that washington is not engaging in honest negotiations. mayr news: iran responds to us proposal to be ready soon. on june 9th, iranian foreign minister syd abbasachi announced that the islamic republic will soon issue an appropriate response to the latest proposal from the united states. according to me news agency during the cabinet session on sunday. anokchi briefed the

government on several key diplomatic matters, including the successful organization of this year's hadge pilgrimage and saudi arabia. favorable cooperation in this event. he also provided updates on the visit of kazakhstan's firm minister to iran and the current status of indirect nuclear negotiations between tehran and washington. arachchi emphasized that iran's response to the us proposal is forthcoming and will be delivered in due course, reflecting the country's national interests and strategic considerations. ear now, the us must abandon israel's failed opinions, if it wants iran deal. parliament speaker. parliament speaker mohammad galibov called on the united states. to reconsider its approach and abandon fail ideas of israely prime minister benjamin netanyahu if it really wants to reach a nuclear deal with iran. the speaker made the remarks as us president donald trump has spoken of zero uranium enrichment and any agreement over iran's nuclear energy program. iran says it reserves the right to enrichment because it is signatory to the npt treatment rejecting washington's

statements which are the echo of israel's stance. the us president is better to know that if he really... wants a deal, he should change his approach and stop following up on the failed opinions of netanyahu, said khalibov as he addressed the iranian parliament session on sunday. the top parliamentarian also referred to a us proposal which iran received through oman on may 31st. he said that the proposal excludes the lifting of the existing sanctions, which shows washington's contradictory and insincere stance in his indirect nuclear negotiations with tehran. iran front page: iranian daily urges 90% ( uranium enrichment limits on iaea in response to snapback threat. a prominent conservative iranian newspaper has called on the government to sharply escalate its nuclear program and restrict international. actions in response to efforts by the us and european powers to revive sanctions under the 2015 nuclear deal snapback mechanism. in an editorial, farhichtegan daily urged that western powers

through the international atomic energy agency (iaea) are pursuing a political agenda aimed at referring iran to the un security council and triggering the reimposition of the pre-jcpoa sanctions. it urged iranian authorities to respond decisively by enriching uranium up to 90. percent and halting the dilution of existing 60% enriching stock piles. the paper also recommended relocating enrichment activities to the fortified fortor facility, deploying advanced centrifuges and expanding r&d efforts, including potential work on uranium metal production. and thank you for joining us in this section. please do stay tuned for the main narrative. the regional context of 2025 is markedly different from that of the post 2015 era. iran itself has... shown surprising diplomatic flexibility. for the first time since 2015, iran and saudi arabia restored full ties.

besides saudi arabia, other arab countries such as the united arab emirates, kuwait, oman and qatar, also encourage resolution of disputes. much of this stems from the october 2023 gaza war between israel and hamas. the massive regional tensions that fall. have made persian gulf states adamant that the next flash point must be managed peacefully. they explicitly told the us, they do not want to be drawn into another war with iran, mainly to focus on their own security and economic agendas. in practice, these states have offered to decouple their security from automatic confrontation with iran, for example, conveying that american bases in the persian gulf would not be used to strike iran. arab emirates where he got hundreds of billions of dollars recently trump visited saudi arabia, qatar and the united for investment. part of this money is a donation from arab

countries to the us to be invested in america, and some funds are for projects that the us is executing in the region. if a war breaks out, the consequences will affect everyone. no country in west asia can remain secure if others are destabilized. the wars in iraq, syria, yemen, and libya have clearly shown this point. this kind of chaos affects many countries far beyond the region. therefore, if regional countries seek security, and they do, and if the us has invested so much, they must work hard to prevent iran from becoming a source of insecurity. needless to say, economics is also a major driver in this context, although from the us. perspective, easing sanctions is not a first priority, it's understood as the main incentive for iran. analysts note that readmitting one to two million barrels per day of iranian oil

could significantly depress global crude prices by as much as $5 to $15 per barrel. indeed, in may 2025, news of talks caused oil futures to dip about 2%. for the us economy and its consumers, lower energy prices. can help reduce inflation and stimulate growth. moreover, tehran's own strategy has evolved. iran no longer relies solely on resisting western pressure, it is vigorously hedging its foreign relations. in recent years, iran has deep in ties with russia, signing a new 20-year strategic agreement in 2024 and maintain its growing relationship with china. the country has also joined international bodies like the shanghai. operation organization and bricks, two prestigious organizations viewed mostly as a big block against western higem.

a strategic city scholar, believes that us sanctions no longer pose a significant. موضوعی که حداقل در یک و نیم دو سال گذشته خیلی one of the most noticeable issues over the past two years is that almost all international institutions. we can say that we are in a transitional period between different international orders. in such a time, sanctions are unlikely to be effective, especially since the sanctions imposed by the us on iran are being largely ignored by other countries. the ongoing tension. between the us and china, the deep disagreements between europe and america and the breakdown of russia, ukraine negotiations mediated by the us, all demonstrate.

that the united states no longer holds the same influence it once did in the international arena. as a result, the sanctions they impose are not taken seriously anymore, and they can no longer serve as a coersive tool against iran. in such a situation, even the use of snapback options, restoration of nuclear sanctions on the jcpi would not exact much pressure on iran and would lack the previous impact. iran despite these sanctions is a steel exporting over a million barrels of oil daily. sometimes this number hits record levels, other times it decreases depending on global demand. all in all, the unexpected us effort to revive a nuclear agreement with iran arises from a complex mix of reasons. politically, trump sees advantage in a deal. it appeals to public desire for peace and lets them assert.

is negotiator image, especially ahead of any future election. strategically, america and its persian gulf allies want to avoid a catastrophic war that could ignite the region and threaten energy supply. economically, the us has recognizes that sanctions on iran have imposed heavy costs not only on the country's economy, but also global markets which has been deprived from iranian oil. and geopolitically, the balance in west asia has shifted. as persian gulf states and even iran's eastern partners are urging diplomacy. this convergence of motivation sets the stage for talks that few predicted a year ago. yet washington under trump has no easy task winning tehran's trust. the jcpo memory and trump's absurd withdrawal in 2018 drive iran to demand iron clad guarantees. the clock is ticking and the world is eager to see if trump can just this...

i believe it has been about 25 years since our nuclear negotiations began. naturally, our economy could not have waited that long to see how these talks would unfold. iran is a vast country with extensive resources, a talented population and more than 13 neighboring countries with geop. political significance, our economy has grown constantly despite many challenges and a certain form of resilient economy has helped iran become more productive in many sectors. in my opinion, western countries have used iran's nuclear issue as a pretext for confronting iran's progress, before the nuclear dossier gained prominance, they had already imposed sanctions on our nation under false pretenses.

such as human rights violations, the primary motivation behind us sanctions on iran has been its desire for independence, that iran should not be able to manage its security mechanisms and make decisions free of outside influence. all nuclear and non-nuclear sanctions have been imposed on iran because the country has refused to fall under us dominance and because it has tried to preserve its that's all for today, thank you for watching from the whole team, please do join us again same times next week to see what else is on. until next time, take care.

the headlines, iran's president says the country continues negotiations with the us and europe, but will neither give in to bullying nor abandon its nuclear industry. iran categorically rejects three european countries allegations about violating the... and security council resolution 22:31 is factually misleading and politically biased and the israeli regime presses ahead with its genocidal war in gaza as the regime's forces massacre more women and children across the besege territory.