Amid the declared positions and threats, both sides are moving toward a possible exchange. Trump has dropped rhetoric about regime change in Iran and scaled back talk of supporting protesters. Tehran, in turn, has waived the conditions it had set for returning to the negotiating table. The remaining disagreements focus on the agenda: Trump insists on an agreement that includes Iran’s full cessation of uranium enrichment, limits on its missile capabilities, and an end to support for its regional “proxies.” Iran, however, says it is ready to discuss only its nuclear program and considers its military capabilities a red line.

The negotiating skills of both sides will be crucial in shaping the agenda, provided the desire to avoid war outweighs the urge to impose impossible conditions. Calculations about the potential consequences of war versus the benefits of reaching an agreement also play an important role.

For Iran, threats to its regime have reached a fever pitch as recent protests follow the disastrous June War, a worsening economic crisis caused by U.S. and European sanctions, the designation of the Revolutionary Guards as a terrorist organization, U.S. efforts to block the return of its ally Nouri al-Maliki to Iraq’s premiership, and India’s active purchase of Venezuelan oil as a substitute for Iranian oil. Predictably, the regime's weakened position makes Tehran more inclined toward diplomacy with the United States.

Calculations on both sides are likely prompting engagement with ongoing diplomatic efforts, potentially sparing the Middle East from another upheaval.