Before the bombs fell on February 28, diplomacy had its chance. Three separate rounds of talks took place in Oman and Switzerland in February. They narrowed some gaps. They resolved nothing. And the momentum toward confrontation proved unstoppable.
Ali Vaez, Director of the Iran Project at the International Crisis Group, traces the diplomatic collapse in Foreign Affairs, as reported by "Hvylya".
The core obstacles were structural. "Stubborn points of divergence remained, especially on Iranian nuclear concessions and on US sanctions relief." Tehran tried to set aside nonnuclear issues - its missile program and support for nonstate allies - but that approach "failed to match Washington's expectations." Trump had delivered an ultimatum demanding Iran abandon its nuclear program at a minimum and, more ambitiously, its ballistic missile development and regional proxy network. That was never a framework for compromise - it was a framework for capitulation.
While diplomats shuttled between Muscat and Geneva, the political winds in Washington and Jerusalem were blowing decisively toward war. Hawkish voices in both capitals pushed for military action. Trump himself "expressed dissatisfaction with how the talks were unfolding." The incremental diplomatic progress, Vaez writes, "proved no match for momentum marching toward confrontation."
The diplomatic window had been narrow from the start. Engagement had been "largely stagnant since last year's 12-day war." Iran's foreign minister had reportedly been in contact with Trump's special envoy before the protests, but Trump briefly rejected continuing diplomatic engagement while repression was ongoing. By the time talks resumed, the US military buildup - two aircraft carrier groups and scores of aircraft, "a buildup in scale and scope not seen since the Iraq war" - had created its own gravitational pull. Diplomacy was running a race it had already lost.
Also read: A Month of Silence: Friedman Reveals the Real Reason Trump Delayed the Strike on Iran