The escalation of tensions between Iran and the United States results from Iran’s insistence on continuing uranium enrichment on its own territory while accepting strict monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The Trump administration has also sought a long-term agreement with Iran. This study examines plausible scenarios for Iran–US relations based on the perspectives of Iranian academic elites. Given the exploratory nature of the research, a qualitative approach using thematic analysis was adopted.The study population consisted of Iranian academic elites, and data were collected through semi-structured interviews with 25 participants. The findings identified four scenarios:
1. Escalation of tensions: Eight respondents (32%) considered this the most likely scenario, assigning it a 70–80% probability.
2. Neither war nor peace: Seven respondents (28%) identified this scenario as most probable, with a 70–80% likelihood.
3. Limited agreement: Six respondents (24%) regarded this scenario as the most likely, also with a 70–80% probability.
4. Peace and full lifting of sanctions: Four respondents (16%) identified this scenario as most likely, with a 70–80% probability.
A limited agreement (the third scenario) has long been a key objective for Iran. Under current conditions, this scenario entails relatively low costs for both sides and could allow the United States to achieve its goals without resorting to force. However, the main challenge is US opposition to Iran maintaining nuclear capacity, due to concerns that Iran may move toward nuclear deterrence and shift the regional balance of power. Following the twelve-day war, the United States has sought to resolve the enrichment issue and other problems with Iran and until these matters are settled, the likelihood of escalating tensions—the first scenario—remains high