Analyst: Iran and US preparing for war but seeking to avoid it as negotiations resume

Recent protests in Iran and the resumption of nuclear negotiations between Tehran and Washington reflect a tense dynamic in which both sides are preparing for possible military confrontation while actively seeking to avert it, according to Middle East analyst Vali Nasr. In an exclusive interview with Anadolu, Nasr stated that the scale and political nature of the latest unrest in Iran—marked by overt calls for regime change—were unprecedented, and were accompanied by explicit US threats of military intervention in support of protesters.

Diplomatic Maneuvering Amid War Rhetoric

Despite early saber‑rattling, Nasr noted that Washington has recently shifted toward diplomacy, engaging regional actors including Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, and Egypt to establish a negotiating framework. “Both Iran and the US are preparing for war, but they don't want to go to war,” he said, describing military deployments and threats as tools of pressure rather than irreversible steps toward conflict.

Changed Iranian Objectives

Nasr argued that Tehran’s goals in current talks differ sharply from those during the 2015 nuclear negotiations. While Iranian leaders previously saw diplomacy as a path to economic reintegration, they now view potential agreements primarily as a means to avoid war. “Their expectations are much, much lower,” he said, adding that Iranian authorities increasingly believe Washington’s ultimate aim is regime change rather than a sustainable nuclear deal. Consequently, any agreement reached may be treated more as an interim ceasefire than a transformative breakthrough.

Leverage and Unresolved Issues

Both sides retain bargaining leverage, Nasr suggested. Iranian leaders believe Trump fears a “messy war,” which could deter full‑scale military action. Meanwhile, ongoing discussions about Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile, IAEA access, and future enrichment levels indicate that its nuclear program remains a live issue despite past strikes. Additional sticking points include Iran’s support for regional proxy groups and its ballistic missile program—the latter being Israel’s primary security concern. While Tehran is unlikely to abandon missile capabilities entirely, Nasr suggested it might consider limits on deployment or range as part of a compromise.