Iran has warned it would target U.S. military bases across the Middle East in retaliation for any future American attack, underscoring the deep mistrust complicating renewed nuclear diplomacy. The statement from Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi followed the first indirect talks between the two sides in over a year, held in Oman on Friday amid escalating tensions.
The meeting, brokered by Omani officials, aimed to break a longstanding deadlock following last year’s strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities, which the U.S. justified as necessary to prevent Tehran from developing nuclear weapons—a goal Iran consistently denies pursuing. Prior to the talks, President Donald Trump had dispatched an increased naval presence to the region and demanded severe limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment and missile activities. While Trump later described the Oman session as “very good,” his administration immediately announced new sanctions targeting over 30 Iranian entities, individuals, and vessels for alleged illicit petroleum trade.
Speaking after the talks, Araghchi called the resumption of dialogue “a good starting point” but stressed that a significant “climate of mistrust” persists, directly attributable to the prior strikes. He articulated Iran’s red lines: while open to negotiating the nuclear issue, Tehran insists uranium enrichment is its sovereign right and will continue at levels determined by domestic needs. He categorically ruled out any negotiations on Iran’s missile program, describing it as a “purely defensive matter.” Crucially, he warned that while Iran could not strike the U.S. homeland, any American attack would provoke a regional response against U.S. forces. “If Washington attacks us, we will strike their bases in the region,” he stated.
The U.S. maintains a substantial military footprint in the Middle East, with major installations in Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, and the United Arab Emirates, alongside deployments in Iraq, Syria, and access agreements with Jordan and Djibouti. Iran has long viewed this network of bases near its borders as an existential threat.
The diplomatic process now moves to a fragile next phase. Further talks are scheduled for the coming week, but the immediate post-meeting imposition of sanctions has reinforced the transactional and adversarial nature of the relationship. Both sides have signaled a willingness to continue talking, yet Araghchi’s warnings and the swift sanctions highlight the immense challenge of building enough trust to achieve a sustainable agreement. The outcome will hinge on whether dialogue can proceed without the threats and punitive measures that each side cites as justification for its own actions.
