As debates in Iran continue over the possibility of negotiations with the United States, divisions have emerged. While some advocate for talks, others remain skeptical about their potential benefits or even feasibility.

Iran's embattled Vice President for Strategic Affairs and former foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, authored an article in Foreign Affairs titled "How Iran Sees the Path to Peace," stating, "The Islamic Republic is open to negotiations – including with America."

Zarif added: "Instead of increasing pressure on Iran, the West should pursue positive-sum solutions. The nuclear deal provides a unique example, and the West should look to revive it. But to do so, it must take concrete and practical actions—including political, legislative, and mutually beneficial investment measures—to make sure Iran can benefit economically from the agreement, as was promised. Should Trump decide to take such steps, then Iran is willing to have a dialogue that would benefit both Tehran and Washington."

While Zarif talked about "reviving" the 2015 nuclear deal, the United States clearly wants a totally new deal covering matters beyond the nuclear issue, including Iran's regional ambitions and its missile program which happens to be a source of concern for Iran's neighbors and European states.

Despite Zarif's overture, hardliner analyst Foad Izadi who is characterized by the Iranian state television as an expert on the United States, told conservative Nameh News website in Tehran: "We cannot say with a one hundred percent assurance whether negotiating with the United States is good or bad for Iran as we do not have access to confidential information."

Expressing distrust of the United States, Izadi accused the US, along with Turkey, of involvement in the Syrian insurgents' surprise attack on government forces allied with Iran. As evidence for his claim, he cited Secretary of State Antony Blinken, who remarked that "the United States was not surprised" by the attack on Aleppo, despite Hay’at Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), the main insurgent group, being designated as a terrorist organization by the US.

Izadi further alleged, "If the Americans did not design the attack, they were at least aware of it—and they are undoubtedly pleased with what is happening in Syria." He added, "The United States' plan is to settle scores with the Islamic Republic within the next four years, as beyond that, it will be unable to act due to Iran's membership in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and BRICS agreements."

He further charged that Iranian supporters of negotiations with the United States are not aware that the other sides use negotiations only “to buy time, to confuse Iranian officials and to wage a psychological war on Iranians."

Iran should negotiate with the United States only when the officials can say with a high degree of certainty that the country is going to be better off after the talks, Izadi said.

Former head of the Iranian parliament's National Security and Foreign Relations Committee, Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh, told the Khabar Online website in Tehran that China and Russia favor Trump's "maximum pressure" policy against Iran. He added that Russia is also wary of any potential agreement between Iran and Europe. However, he noted that Europe’s primary goal in its negotiations with Tehran is to address its own concerns.

Falahatpisheh emphasized that the United States remains the primary actor in negotiations with Iran. He argued that Iran's best course of action is to persuade Europe not to allow itself to be leveraged by the US to trigger the 2015 nuclear deal’s snapback mechanism against Iran.

He concluded, "Trump will never engage in negotiations that do not advance the interests of the United States."