Iran is pursuing a nuclear agreement with the United States centred on mutual economic benefits, greatly mirroring the US arrangement recently discussed between Washington and Russia. Tehran has proposed cooperation in oil and gas development, mining investment and aircraft purchases in an effort to avoid military confrontation.

The Iranian proposal bears a striking resemblance to economic cooperation frameworks discussed between Trump and Russia during recent Anchorage negotiations, where Moscow proposed cooperation valued between $2 trillion and $12 trillion. Both arrangements suggest Trump is exploring transactional diplomacy that offers adversarial states economic engagement in exchange for strategic concessions, which is a stark departure from traditional containment approaches that have defined US policy toward both Tehran and Moscow for decades.

On February 6, the US and Iran engaged in negotiations in Oman, with Trump indicating a preference for diplomacy over military action, although no agreement was reached. Still, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has expressed scepticism over Iran’s intentions, subsequently presenting evidence challenging Iranian credibility during a White House meeting with Trump. Netanyahu alleged that Iranian security forces continued killing civilians despite pledges to cease such actions, whilst accusing Tehran of never intending to discuss non-nuclear issues in negotiations, such as its ballistic missile programme.

Hamid Ghanbari, Iran's deputy director for economic diplomacy, told a meeting at Iran's Chamber of Commerce that negotiations include "shared interests in areas such as energy, joint oil and gas fields, fast-return mineral investments, urban development and buying planes," according to Fars news agency and Reuters.

"For the sake of an agreement's durability, it is essential that the US also benefits in areas with high and quick economic returns. Common interests in the oil and gas fields, joint fields, mining investments, and even aircraft purchases are included in the negotiations," Ghanbari stated, as per Iran International, adding that the 2015 nuclear agreement failed partly because it provided no tangible economic benefits for Washington.

Scepticism remains about whether such arrangements would materialise. Historical precedent suggests Washington has shown limited willingness to facilitate economic development for strategic competitors, particularly given Russia's experience following the Soviet Union's collapse, when initial Western cooperation euphoria gave way to prolonged economic isolation and strategic competition.

Ghanbari specified that any release of Iran's blocked funds must be "real and usable", not symbolic, and could be implemented incrementally or immediately.