Analysis: Iran braces for potential conflict as 5th round of US negotiations ends inconclusively

By Janatan Sayeh | May 23, 2025

Israeli Air Force members wait for F-35I Adirs to launch for a Red Flag-Nellis 23-2 mission at Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada, March 16, 2023.  (Photo by Airman 1st Class Trevor Bell – Dvidshuv, Public Domain)

As the fifth round of negotiations between Tehran and Washington concluded in Rome, signs of progress remained elusive. Iranian state media reported on May 23 that US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steven Witkoff had left the talks prematurely. Citing two anonymous Iranian officials, CNN noted the same day that Tehran doubted the meetings would yield any agreement. An Iranian official speaking to The National on May 19 also voiced skepticism over the prospects of a breakthrough.

Islamic Republic Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei struck a similarly pessimistic tone during a May 20 sermon. Khamenei asserted that the negotiations were unlikely to bear fruit and denounced US demands for zero uranium enrichment as “outrageous and excessive.” On May 21, Kayhan, a newspaper aligned with Khamenei’s office, argued that the negotiations had failed to produce meaningful outcomes and called for a shift in policy toward “active resistance” against the United States. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi reinforced this position on May 22, reiterating that Iran would not relinquish its enrichment capabilities.

Initially ambiguous, US messaging grew firmer in early May. President Donald Trump stated in a May 4 interview that he would accept nothing short of the “total dismantlement” of Iran’s nuclear program—a stance which, in technical terms, implies an end to all uranium enrichment. Witkoff reaffirmed this view on May 9 and again on May 19, declaring that uranium enrichment constitutes a red line and warning it could lead to “weaponization.”

Iran issues escalating warnings amid Israeli threats

Citing anonymous US officials, CNN reported on May 20 that new intelligence suggests Israel is preparing a potential strike on Iranian nuclear sites—though Jerusalem has yet to finalize any decision. While an Israeli strike during active negotiations remains unlikely, the apparent stalemate in Rome may bolster the legitimacy of such an option.

Tehran is taking the threat seriously. On May 22, Araghchi described the leak as “alarming and [it] warrants immediate and serious condemnation from the UN Security Council and the IAEA.” He further warned that the regime would take “special measures” in retaliation should an attack materialize.

Iran’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations submitted Araghchi’s letter to the United Nations secretary-general and the United Nations Security Council, warning of “catastrophic consequences” and declaring that “the Government of the United States shall bear legal responsibility” for any Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear infrastructure.

Tasnim News, a media outlet affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), argued on May 21 that threats against Iran stem from its refusal to disarm and vowed that any Israeli attack would be met with retaliation more severe than the initial strike.

The United States, signaling resolve, has ramped up its regional military posture since March. Over 100 heavy transport aircraft have delivered military equipment to American bases across the Middle East. On May 19, the US deployed an additional squadron of F-15E fighter jets to Diego Garcia, bringing the total to six and complementing a prior deployment of nearly one-third of its B-2 stealth bomber fleet to that base.

IRGC General and Iranian Armed Forces Chief of Staff Mohammad Bagheri followed suit with threats against Israel and the US. Bagheri framed Iran’s prior attacks on Israel in April and October 2024 (Operations True Promise I and II) as a deterrent against further military action.

2024 Iran-Israel escalations favored Jerusalem

Regardless of Bagheri’s framing of Iran’s retaliatory operations against Israel, they have largely failed to strengthen Iran’s strategic position. Following Israel’s April 2024 strike on IRGC officials near Iran’s consulate in Damascus, Tehran responded by launching 170 drones, over 30 cruise missiles, and more than 120 ballistic missiles toward Israel. Nearly all the projectiles were intercepted by the combined efforts of Israel, the United States, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia. No fatalities were reported.

In the wake of the assassinations of Hamas Political Chief Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran on July 31 and Hezbollah Secretary-General Hassan Nasrallah on September 27, Iran launched another wave of projectiles on Israel—this time, over 200 ballistic missiles. The attack resulted in only two deaths, one Israeli and one Palestinian, and caused limited damage to Israeli infrastructure and military bases.

Rather than deterring future actions, Iran’s strikes gave Israel a long-awaited pretext to directly target Iranian military assets within Iranian territory—a move it had contemplated since at least 2012. In doing so, Israel destroyed critical air defense systems, missile stockpiles, and previously undeclared facilities as far as 500 kilometers east of Tehran. The outcome has left Iran increasingly vulnerable to future attacks.

While Iran escalated its responses with each round of conflict, Tehran has disproportionately borne the long-term costs. The regime may feel compelled to escalate again if provoked, but it is increasingly aware that doing so could result in even more severe consequences.

Janatan Sayeh is a research analyst at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies focused on Iranian domestic affairs and the Islamic Republic’s regional malign influence.