Interview with The New York Times, June 23, 2026
By Erika Solomon
It took two devastating wars and the collapse of two previous attempts at mediation.
Now, regional experts say, Iran and the United States finally look ready at least to try to strike a deal in good faith.
Pessimism was high when negotiations kicked off last weekend in Switzerland, hosted by international mediators and bringing together delegations led by Vice President JD Vance and Iran’s speaker of Parliament, Mohammed Bagher Ghalibaf.
The mistrust between the two nations is deep and decades old. It took mediators months of wrangling to draft a framework for talks that the two sides could agree to. Since talks began, the sides have portrayed their content so differently that one might ask whether they were attending the same negotiations.
Yet political analysts say both Tehran and Washington now have real need for progress.
Sasan Karimi, a political scientist at the University of Tehran and a former Iranian government official, said he thought the maximalist demands on both sides were mostly posturing.
Differences existed, he said, “but not as big as is being shown.” The rhetoric was likely intended to satisfy both countries’ tough domestic audiences, he added.
Mr. Trump, who once vowed to force Iran’s surrender, and to secure a better nuclear deal than President Barack Obama, now has to show that the massive global costs of the war he started were worth it.
And Iran’s government, Mr. Karimi added, has to contend with a hard-line base of support that objects to a deal with the United States, and which some local polls estimate makes up around 38 percent of the population. Iran’s new ruling class may see that as a crucial demographic it needs to appeal to after losing so many top leaders during the war.
Popular discontent in Iran remains high — only a month before the war began, security forces had to brutally quell nationwide antigovernment protests.
:The New York Times link
:File
