Iran Nuclear Talks — Is West Asia Being Pulled To The Edge?

Iran nuclear talks — Is West Asia being pulled to the edge?

By Talmiz Ahmad New Delhi, December 8: After four days of heated deliberations, the first round of renewed talks on reviving Iran’s nuclear agreement was suspended on December 3.

 Iran Nuclear Talks — Is West Asia Being Pulled To The Edge?-TeluguStop.com

The US and European Union (EU), diplomats immediately launched into a full-throated denunciation against Iran.

This was backed up by strong worded Israeli reports about advanced military preparations to strike the Islamic Republic.The region’s edge is once more in danger of conflict between West Asia and Iran.

The EU diplomats stated that Tehran is “walking back”, on all the achievements of the six previous rounds of talks in Vienna in April-June 2021.These negotiations were suspended just days before the Iranian presidential election.Five months later, the P4+1 nations, Russia, China and the UK, plus Germany and EU, had met Iranian negotiators in Vienna on November 29.

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Ali Bagheri Kani led a new team after the elections.The US delegation was present in Vienna as usual, but they did not participate in the discussions.The EU representative chaired the meetings and carried messages between the delegations that met informally at the Coburg Palace hotel, and the US team in another hotel.

US criticisms and Israeli sword-rattling

December 3 saw the negotiations abruptly halted to allow all parties to consult with their governments.Participants were allowed to return a week later with possibly new instructions.The Western diplomats began to retaliate.They pointed out that Iran had “interrupted (the previous) negotiations” and had since “fast-forwarded his nuclear programme”, while retracing “on the diplomatic advances made earlier”.

Antony Blinken, the US Secretary of State, stated that Iran “doesn’t seem to be serious about doing whatever’s necessary to return compliance”.This skilfully ignored the fact that it was the US under President Donald Trump which had withdrawn the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), when Iran had been fully compliant with its provisions.

He had then imposed the most severe sanctions to try to get a “better” deal.

Later, on December 4, a Washington state department official spoke at a press conference where he presented the American view of this impasse.

His main points were:

Iran deliberately delayed the return to talks in order “to accelerate its nuclear program in particularly provocative ways”.This was unacceptable.

Iran had “new demands” to the renewed discussions, which indicated that it wasn’t seriously thinking “of an immediate return to mutual compliance”.Thus, Iran was denying its people the benefits of sanctions relief.

Iran’s “new demands” included sanctions relief “well beyond the scope” of the JCPOA.

Iran achieved 20 percent uranium enrichment at the Fordow facility.

This was followed by another 60 percent enrichment.The goal was to “extract less from us (the US), and give more (on) their side.” .This negotiating tactic will backfire”, as parts of the world’s opinion that were previously supportive of Iran will now realize that Iran has no interest in returning to JCPOA.

The US will continue to pursue negotiations at Vienna.However, “we are ready to.use additional tools when necessary” if Iran isn’t prepared to return to a mutual return-to-compliance.

Israel was concerned about the possibility of reopening dialogue with Iran.

One, it was concerned that the negotiators would make too many concessions to Iran.Two, it was concerned that the US would accept an interim deal involving a partial lifting sanctions to force Iran to end its enrichment program and to allow full IAEA oversight.

Israel was concerned that Iran would not be able to obtain a partial lifting of sanctions, given its financial resources and its aggressive position in the region.

Both concerns were addressed when Israel announced that Iran was increasing its uranium enrichment level to 90 percent, which is the weapon-grade level, during the talks.

The Iranian spokesperson at the Vienna talks dismissed the Israeli reports as trying to “to poison the Vienna negotiations” and called for the negotiators’ “independence and political will”.

Israeli leaders have been provocative throughout the talks and after their suspension.

Prime Minister Naftali Bennet called on Blinken not to succumb to Iran’s “nuclear extortion” and to immediately end the dialogue in Vienna.He stated that Israel would not make the same mistake as it did in 2015 by accepting the 2015 agreement.

It would now “maintain its freedom of action” and that even if there were an agreement, Israel was not a party to it or be bound by it.In a rare development, David Barnea, Chief Mossad, stated publicly that Israel would do “whatever it takes to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons.

Benny Gantz, Defence Minister, stated that “the military option must always remain on the table”.Amikam Norkin (Air Force Chief) gave details to Israeli television about planned bombings of Iran and the Air Force’s readiness to handle diverse challenges.

He stated that the issue (attacking Iran), was high on the agenda.Commentators claim that Bennett and Gantz directed the armed forces prepare for an attack against Iran and to defend against retaliation.An additional $1.4 billion was added to the defense budget.

Recent reports indicate that Israel is increasing its smart bunker buster bombs to strike nuclear facilities deep underground.It also plans to acquire new Iron Dome missile defense interceptors to defend against Iranian rocket attacks.Israel’s military plans include an attack on Hezbollah in Lebanon, as well as other pro-Iran militants from neighboring countries.

In the midst of all this noise and fury, Mikhail Ulyanov (Russian ambassador to the Vienna talks) reminded observers that the “disapointment.

seems premature”; multilateral diplomacy can always be a long haul in that “nothing has been agreed until everything is accepted”, and that the break would allow all sides to “think about how to proceed further, taking into consideration the positions of their counterparts”.

How did this stage of military and diplomatic brinkmanship occur?

Runup to Vienna

First, Iran now has a government that is more committed to the principles and less trustful towards the US.Kasra Aarabi, a commentator, has pointed out that President Ebrahim Raisi, along with his team of senior officials, represent a “systemic shift” in the political system that seeks greater Islamization of Iran’s society, better administration efficiency, and better management of its economy.It is more distrustful of the West, especially the US, and doesn’t believe that the latter will ease sanctions, even if the JCPOA is renewed.

Raisi does not consider renewal of the JCPOA a priority, just as it was for the Rouhani government.

Ali Bagheri Kani is the Iranian negotiator in Vienna.

He is at the core of the current ideological and political approach in Tehran.He has been a consistent critic of the JCPOA.

He had previously referred to the JCPOA as “sick child”, denied its backing by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, and stated that Iran had also made many concessions in the agreement.He had criticised those who were “simple-mindedly optimist” about the outcome of the negotiations.

After the US pulled out of the JCPOA in 2019, Iran realized that the other parties in the deal couldn’t reduce the impact of US sanctions.In 2019, Iran began to violate specific provisions of that agreement.

It installed and used a few advanced centrifuges that were not permitted under the JCPOA.It also produced 210kg of uranium with an enrichment of 19.75 percent and 25 kg at 60%, respectively, as opposed to the permissible enrichment of 3.65 under the agreement.

Finally, Iran produced 200g uranium metal from uranium enriched at 19.75 percent.This metal can be enriched to 90 percent to become the core of a nuke weapon.Although these actions are provocative, they can be reversed.

They are intended to strengthen Iran’s negotiating position in Vienna.The US has called for “mutual compliance” to end these nuclear-related violations.

This means that Iran’s return of nuclear enrichment provisions in the JCPOA will be placed on par with the US’ withdrawal from the JCPOA, and the lifting of crippling US sanctions to which it had subjected Iran, even though it was fully in compliance with the agreement.These sanctions have led to the impoverishment of 30 million Iranians, a population of 85million, and an inflation rate of 60%.They also caused a contraction in the economy of 7 percent between 2019 and 2020.Donald Trump’s policies have caused Iran’s oil exports to plummet from 2.5 million barrels per hour in 2016 to 4,00,000.

Here is the problem.

The sanctions imposed by the US on Iran are limited to the nuclear issue.They do not include many other sanctions that were imposed for Iranian failures such as violations of human rights, development of missiles and support for terrorist groups (which in America include Hezbollah or Hamas) and Iran’s interference in the affairs of neighboring states.

The Trump administration placed many of its sanctions on these bases rather than the nuclear issue.These distinctions are not important to Iran.

It considers that compliance with JCPOA provisions is the same as lifting all sanctions imposed under Trump’s “maximum pressure” campaign.

Kani clearly stated the Iranian position in an opinion piece published in the Financial Times on the eve the Vienna talks.

Kani rejected the use of “nuclear talks” as Iran was only committed to a “legitimate, peaceful” nuclear program.He stated that Vienna’s main issue was to “gain a complete, guaranteed, and verifiable elimination of sanctions.” He also rejected the use of the term “mutual compliance”, as it was the US that unilaterally pulled out from the agreement.Instead, he stressed that the US should prioritize “compensation” for violations of the agreement, which includes the lifting of all post-JCPOA restrictions.

He reminded his colleagues that Iran had not accepted any military threats, economic sanctions, or “maximum pressure” from Trump and would not under Biden.

It is therefore not surprising that Iran submitted two proposals to Vienna.

One was a proposal to lift US sanctions and the other was to determine how Iran would return to full compliance under the JCPOA.After the two previous proposals were accepted, the Iranian delegation stated that it would submit a third paper on oil exports and foreign currency transactions to show that sanctions have been effectively lifted.

Future of the JCPOA

It is hard to predict whether the principals in the Vienna suspended talks — Iran and the US — will offer new, more accommodative ideas and approaches on the eve.Their first encounter could have been characterized by some posturing and presentation maximalist positions.

Commentators took advantage of the brief hiatus to offer new suggestions.Robert Hunter, a distinguished regional affairs writer, suggested that the US rejoin the JCPOA it unilaterally resigned from in 2018 and then follow its agenda within the framework.

It would leave the question of which sanctions to lift unresolved.However, the US could begin with those related to nuclear issues and create a better environment for other matters to be discussed.

Hunter reminded Biden that it was the Republican President who, inexorably, encouraged by the Israeli Prime Minister, created the crisis.He also urged Biden for “a little domestic political courage” to rejoin the agreement, as he promised during his election campaign.

Another idea is for the US and Iran to reach an interim agreement.In return for Iran’s withdrawal from its enrichment program, this would require the US lifting some sanctions.

This is, however, strongly opposed by Israel and unlikely to find support in America due to the weak political position and polarised nature US politics.

Trita Parsi (an authority on Iranian affairs) suggested that the JCPOA be placed into a “coma” because the principals are unable to move forward in any meaningful way.This means that the JCPOA should not be reaffirmed nor taken forward until a more favorable political situation arises.This proposal has a problem.

The nuclear issue cannot be put in a coma due to the fast-moving developments in West Asia, deep rivalries, animosities, and “existential” threats.A frenzied Israel, supported by its powerful lobby in America, will undoubtedly mobilize support for war against Iran if it continues to pursue enrichment.Even though sage advisors might suggest otherwise.

Yossi Melman (an Israeli intelligence and security commentator) has written about the difficulties involved in conducting a successful military operation against Iran’s nuclear capabilities.

He also noted that Iran would rebuild these facilities within a year or so even if the facilities were destroyed.Melman believes that Vienna is unlikely to reach an agreement on sanctions or enrichment.

The best course of action is for the US (and other regional allies), to provide Israel with a guaranteed nuclear umbrella.This would protect Israel against a nuclear Iran threat, while also giving it the freedom to defend its interests through conventional means, such as secret operations.

Outlook for the regional order

It is difficult to believe that the Vienna talks will lead to positive outcomes.It is difficult to believe that the two main protagonists will reach a consensus on the issues of sanctions and enrichment.

This is compounded by the many differences that have accumulated over the past few decades.It is possible that the JCPOA will be discarded, just as previous initiatives to promote understanding between these countries, which were divided over the last four decades.

The Iranian side seems to have realized that the revival and maintenance of the nuclear accord will not be in its best interests.To avoid a repeat of Trump’s mistakes, Iran insists that the US offer guarantees to ensure that future administrations do not unilaterally abandon the agreement, as Trump did in 2018.Biden’s weak political position makes it impossible for him to offer such a guarantee.Without such a guarantee, Iran’s re-entry into the JCPOA is very limited.Gerard Araud, France’s former ambassador at the UN, stated that “Even if JCPOA were restored, no Western company would dare to invest a cent in Iran and no western bank would finance any deal with Iran with the threat from the return of US sanctions 2025.” .It is known by the Iranians.”

The Raisi administration has thus signalled a new direction in Iran’s interest — Asia.Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, the Foreign Minister, stated shortly after his appointment that he would pursue a balanced, active and dynamic foreign policy that is based on mutual respect and prioritising relations with Asia and neighbours.and strengthening the role of economic diplomacy.The Raisi government released an economic roadmap in December that included new investments to create 1.8m jobs by March 2023, four million more housing units, and doubling non-crude oil exports to $70billion by 2025.Iran is showing new confidence in its economic future, despite the damage that US sanctions have done to its economy.

As Iran becomes increasingly isolated from the Western powers it will likely find greater comfort in a closer relationship with China and Russia.

Both these powers have supported Iran at Vienna.The talks were suspended on December 3.Ulyanov, the Russian ambassador, supported Iran’s demand for guarantees that the US would not pull out of the JCPOA in the future.He stated that the Iranians are entitled to guarantees.

It must be certain that the malicious experiment under Donald Trump’s’maximum Pressure’ policy.is not repeated.”

China has also supported Iran.Wang Qun, China’s ambassador at the UN and other international organizations in Vienna, linked western criticisms of Iran’s uranium enrichment to the AUKUS agreement.He had asked: “Why do the US, UK and Iran say Iran can’t enrich its uranium above 3.7 percent while they plan to transfer tonnes worth of highly enriched material (to AUKUS)?” He called western conduct “double-standard” and “nuclear hypercrisy”.This was in reference to the weapons-grade of uranium the US and Britain have committed to providing as fuel for the nuclear submarines they are contracted with Australia.

Later, the Chinese ambassador called for the lifting of all sanctions not compatible with the nuclear agreement, including restrictions on Iran trade with China.

This refers to secondary sanctions which restrict economic ties between third countries and Iran.

The Biden administration’s inability to reverse the damage done to Iran and the regional order seems like it is strengthening the bonds between the countries the US has demonised and castigated.

It may also have accelerated the formation of a rival alliance that will be at center of the new order.

(The author is a former ambassador to Saudi Arabia and Oman, and holds the Ram Sathe chair for international studies, Symbiosis International University in Pune.

India Narrative is not responsible for the views expressed.

(The content is being transmitted under an agreement with indianarrative.com

–indianarrative #Iran #nuclear #Asia #pulled #edge #Delhi #Washington #China #Germany #Delhi #New Delhi #Washington #Russia #America #Idea #Republican

.

Disclaimer : TeluguStop.com Editorial Team not involved in creation of this article & holds no responsibility for its content..This Article is Provided by IANS, Please contact IANS if any issues in Article .


Follow Us on FacebookFollow Us on WhatsAppFollow Us on Twitter