With the lapse of two months since his inauguration as the new president of the United States, Joe Biden has not decided how to begin implementing his perceptions of Iran.

Tehran and Washington exchanged blame for not starting the diplomatic track, despite the desire of both parties to enter it, and officials of the two countries claim that the ball is in the court of the other side.

Despite the decline in the importance of the Middle East files to the new administration at the expense of the issues of confronting the Covid-19 virus, China and the climate, the media or political interest in the issue of negotiating with Iran has not decreased.

Al-Jazeera Net polled the opinions of a number of experts on Iranian affairs in the American capital, which showed a wide division in their vision of how Biden would deal with the Iranian file.

Barbara Slavin: Washington needs to take the first step

Barbara Slavin, an expert on Iranian affairs and director of the Future of Iran Initiative at the Atlantic Council, expressed her frustration that the Biden administration did not provide further signals, especially with regard to alleviating the consequences of the suffering of Iranians due to the Corona virus, before expecting Iran to begin to back down from Its nuclear program.

"However, I think the Iranians should agree to a meeting without preconditions. Holding a meeting is not a concession, as many argue over and over again, and it is necessary to hold a meeting to agree on how to sequence a mutual return to compliance with the terms of the nuclear agreement," she said - .

Slavin - who is known to communicate with actors in Washington and Tehran - pointed out that "there is a lack of confidence between the two sides after 4 years of the rule and positions of the Donald Trump administration."

"More than that, we are on the verge of presidential elections in Iran, and there are some reports that the Supreme Leader and the conservatives do not want the sanctions to be eased so that this does not serve the survival of President Hassan Rouhani in office," she added.

She believes that all the doors of possibilities are open, and Slavin told Al-Jazeera Net that "the Iranians and the Americans tell me that there are more than 50% chances to return to negotiations. But the question is: When? Surely the Europeans are working hard to bridge the gap between the two parties."

She said that the United States should "take the first step, as the United States was the first to leave the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the nuclear deal)."

Slavin believes that Washington could inform South Korea, Japan and other countries that have frozen Iranian assets that they can be used to buy food and medicine for the Iranians.

Michael Rubin: Biden must know that we're in 2021

As for Michael Rubin, a former official at the US Department of Defense and an expert at the American Enterprise Institute, he expected - in an interview with Al Jazeera Net - an escalation between the two parties.

"Biden has certainly indicated his willingness to negotiate," Robin said, "but he does not seem to understand that we are in 2021 and not in 2015. While he has extended an olive branch by allowing Iraq, Oman and South Korea to transfer billions of dollars to Iran, and also by canceling Classifying terrorism against the Houthis, it allowed himself a great internal criticism, because there was no resulting improvement in Iranian behavior or any serious indication of their interest in rapprochement.

Rubin does not expect a return to the previous nuclear agreement signed in 2015, and believed that "the provisions of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action make it difficult to return to the previous situation."

The United States calls on Iran to get rid of enriched uranium, which exceeds the limits set in the 2015 agreement, while Iran is demanding that the sanctions be lifted before any moves of this kind take place.

And the problem is further complicated, from Washington's point of view, that many of the sanctions are terrorism-related, and have nothing to do with the nuclear file.

However, Rubin expects that "direct talks will eventually resume, although Iran will publicly deny this in order to obtain a reward before they come to the negotiating table, and the Iranians are unlikely to speak with any objectivity about issues of disagreement with Washington before their next presidential election."

Rubin considered that Iran was following a strategy it had become accustomed to, according to which Tehran would receive incentives before serious talks.

They received nearly $ 12 billion before the 2015 agreement was signed, and Iran is playing on the edge of the abyss, and there is no reason to rush with it.

Sina Azudi: Biden has not abandoned Trump's policy

Sina Azoudi, an expert at the Atlantic Council and a researcher with the Foundation for Gulf States Studies, said that the Biden administration had already taken symbolic steps toward Iran aimed at easing tensions.

Nonetheless, in practice it has followed and maintained the maximum pressure campaign Trump has put on Iran.

In an interview with Al-Jazeera Net, Azoudi indicated that there are two perspectives to deal with to understand some of the dimensions of the current crisis.

The first is that Tehran believes that since the United States withdrew from the agreement, it is up to the United States to correct the mistake and return.

He said that Tehran showed some flexibility in this regard, and initially called for the complete lifting of the sanctions, but now indicated that it is open to a gradual lifting in stages.

According to Azoudi, Washington believes it already has a lot of levers of pressure on Tehran, and says Iran should start complying with the agreement first.

In essence, the two sides believe that each other's position is better than that of the other side, and they are so entrenched in their positions that they fear that showing flexibility can be seen as a sign of weakness for the other side.

Azoudi indicated his belief that "direct talks between Tehran and Washington are inevitable, and it is not about whether or not they happen, but rather it is about timing."

Sina Azoudi believes that both sides view the first step initiative as "a sign of weakness, and I believe that the two sides should agree to meet without any precondition to clarify their positions. This does not mean that they have to come up with all the details, but agreeing to the talks creates an environment where flexibility appears." Much easier. "