Iran Signals Preference for Vance in US Talks Shift
- By Thetripurapost Desk, Teheran
- Mar 25, 2026
- 571
Amid heightened tensions in the Middle East, Iran has reportedly conveyed to the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump its preference to engage in negotiations through Vice President J. D. Vance rather than members of Trump’s close advisory circle.
According to media reports citing diplomatic sources, Tehran is reluctant to negotiate with figures such as Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, whom it associates with earlier failed engagements that coincided with military escalation involving the United States and Israel. Iranian officials are said to view renewed offers of dialogue with scepticism, suspecting them to be tactical delays ahead of potential further action.
While reports suggest Iran’s inclination toward Vance stems from his perceived caution regarding military intervention, the White House has firmly rejected claims that Tehran can influence the choice of American negotiators. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt reiterated that the decision rests solely with President Trump.
Trump, for his part, indicated that multiple senior figures—including Marco Rubio, Witkoff, and Kushner—remain involved in the broader diplomatic process, even as speculation grows about Vance’s expanding role in shaping U.S. foreign policy.
Sources suggest that Iran views Vance as comparatively less inclined toward military escalation and potentially more open to de-escalation efforts. However, Iranian officials stress that any meaningful negotiation would require a representative perceived as independent of recent military decisions.
On the Iranian side, attention has also turned to Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf as a possible interlocutor, although he has publicly denied any ongoing talks with Washington. As with the U.S., Tehran remains cautious about its negotiating representatives, with final authority resting with the Supreme Leader.
Despite ongoing backchannel communications, both sides remain deeply mistrustful. Iran has made clear it is not seeking an unconditional ceasefire, instead positioning itself as negotiating from a stance of relative strength.
Regional dynamics have further complicated the situation. Gulf nations have shown reluctance to mediate under current conditions, while countries such as Turkey and Pakistan have been mentioned as potential facilitators, though no formal framework has been established.
Prior to the outbreak of conflict on February 28, indirect negotiations had taken place through intermediaries, notably with Oman acting as a conduit. Sayyid Badr bin Hamad Al Busaidi played a key role in relaying messages between Washington and Tehran during multiple rounds of discussions held in Muscat and Geneva.
Those talks, involving figures such as Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and U.S. representatives, focused on curbing Iran’s nuclear programme, easing sanctions, and averting conflict. However, entrenched distrust and irreconcilable differences ultimately derailed any breakthrough, paving the way for escalation.
At present, even before formal negotiations can resume, uncertainty over representation and deep-seated mistrust continue to hinder diplomatic progress between the two sides.