The possibility of the resumption of negotiations on Iranian nuclear power enters a decisive phase thanks to a series of preliminary meetings which took place indirectly between the representatives of Washington and Tehran following diplomatic pressure exerted by both the two sides and the European Union. The goal is to restore the document signed during the Obama presidency and unilaterally canceled by Trump, but without the consent of the other signatories. For the US and the other signatories it is important that Iran respects the nuclear deal and for Iran it is essential that the United States lift the sanctions and allow the Persian economy to restart. If materially the meeting between the two delegations did not take place, the commitment of European diplomacy has concretely allowed remote dialogue. The current situation is to be ascribed to Trump’s erroneous strategy, which, by withdrawing from the treaty, favored the conditions for Iran’s return to uranium enrichment and, at the same time, created the conditions for Tehran to deem it groundless to sit at a table with the US, without Washington withdrawing the sanctions. From a political point of view, Iran’s position would be unexceptionable were it not that it too substantially withdrew from the agreement by enriching uranium. The current situation is stalemate: Biden wants the agreement back, but will not withdraw the sanctions until a new Iranian fulfillment, vice versa Tehran first demands the withdrawal of the sanctions to sit back at the table with the US and then get to ensure the ‘ interruption of uranium enrichment processes. This blockade situation could be removed by a demonstration of goodwill by the Americans, as the American spokesman also stated, who considers it necessary to stop the sanctions in order to restart the negotiations; words received positively in Iran, which suggest a positive solution. The latest preliminary meetings have resulted in the establishment of two working groups that will respectively regard the methods to interrupt the American sanctions and the path to restore the conditions of the agreement in the Iranian country. Washington, while preparing itself favorably for the development of the situation, maintains a low profile in the face of the possibility of a success of the negotiation, given that the time frame for the restoration of the agreement does not seem to be short. The US refuses the logic of first proceeding with the sanctions block to arrive at the consequent Iranian action, rather they prefer a synchronous modality with Tehran in the joint renunciation of the current conditions. For this purpose it is important that the two parties establish a procedure marked with certain times in the various steps, even if it is difficult to foresee a certain timeframe to reach the end of the process. The common goal of Washington and Brussels is to arrive at a solution before the Iranian elections in June, so that even a government of a different direction from the current one finds a situation already defined, however, several analysts believe it is highly unlikely to conclude the process by the date. election and this could cause a new start of negotiations with new interpreters and conditions. For the White House it is important to avoid a rapprochement of Tehran with Beijing, also caused by the common interest of weakening the dominance of the American currency in the world, a factor that has been at the basis of the success of the American sanctions, not only against Iran but also against other international entities. This argument, however, can be the basis of a project with a medium or long term, in the immediate future it is not feasible and the needs of the short term for Iran are to revitalize its economy, which is suffering, beyond the sanctions , the bad domestic and international economic situation and the effects of the pandemic. These practical reasons could be the decisive factor in giving an even greater impetus to the negotiations and resolving a situation for Washington that can divert American attention and resources to allocate them to scenarios considered more decisive, such as that of Southeast Asia, while for stability regional Iran without nuclear weapons would also mean the lack of proliferation by Saudi Arabia and a more cautious attitude by Israel.