Negotiation Deadlock Is a Normal Part of Great Power Rivalry

Historically, the mutual trust between the US and Iran has always been fragile. Reaching an agreement often requires a political window, and maintaining it depends more on domestic political consensus. The problem is that both the US and Iran experience cyclical changes in their domestic politics, which makes any long-term agreement inherently unstable.
Therefore, nuclear negotiations are more like a series of ceasefire agreements rather than a permanent reconciliation plan. Both sides need to adopt a tough stance to garner domestic support while avoiding losing control of the situation. This "dual-track logic" means that negotiation setbacks are the norm.
For the global landscape, US-Iran relations are part of the Middle East security architecture, influencing Israel, Gulf countries, and even great power rivalries. The sensitivity of the nuclear issue lies in its symbolic significance: it represents whether the regional balance of power is being disrupted.
From this perspective, negotiations themselves are a risk management tool. Their existence at least indicates that all parties are still willing to keep conflicts within a negotiable range. #美伊核谈判风波