Even in conditions of military conflict, diplomacy and playing the role of mediator actors should become worthwhile. Therefore, it is necessary to strive for win-win interests.
External challenges to the agreement increased. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi was supposed to present a plan for a nuclear agreement with the United States at the sixth round of nuclear talks in Muscat and pave the way for an agreement, However, with Israel’s unilateral attack on Iran and the martyrdom of the country’s military commanders and scientists at the beginning of the sixth round of talks, the negotiations were plunged into a haze of ambiguity.
Finally, with a dual approach from the United States, Iran spoke of the pointlessness of the negotiations amid an all-out military invasion of Iran.
From Iran’s perspective, the Israeli attacks are the result of direct support from Washington, and the continuation of indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States in a state of war is unjustifiable. Israel’s strike capabilities were underestimated, or the attack was not properly detected. After the Israeli attacks, Iran’s leader replaced some commanders, and the government’s work devided to control the situation in the form of four committees to prepare for a crisis and a longer-term, all-out war.
The Leader of the Islamic Revolution emphasized in a message addressed to the Iranian nation: “The armed forces will act with power and will make the scoundrel Zionist regime miserable”. It seems that the government is also trying to increase the nationalist sense of common nationalism of the Iranian people against a foreign enemy, and the convergence of the state and the nation with nationalist approaches.
Iranian military officials believe that the attacks will expand with our attacks in the coming days. Mohammad Reza Qaraei Ashtiani, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Armed Forces, considers Iran’s response crushing, painful, and regrettable. In his view, any crossing of Iran’s red lines will have serious consequences for the region, and our armed forces are fully prepared to carry out the assigned missions within the framework of pre-developed operational plans.
Many in Tehran believe that Washington’s role in planning and directing the attack, means official US participation in an operation that could be the source of a full-scale conflict in the region. So, Tehran is also considering creating the conditions to cut off the IAEA’s hand in inspections and, if necessary, withdraw from the NPT.
However, Iran still does not want to be deprived of its nuclear rights. However, Tehran’s approach has shown that it has an eye on peace and negotiations. The format of trilateral dialogue and consultation between Iran, China, and Russia is still in place. Despite the Europeans’ offer to Tehran to urgently negotiate on its nuclear program and the hope of stopping the cycle of violence, Iran is not very optimistic about the Europeans.
In contrast, the view of Russia as a neighbor and one of Iran’s old allies is positive. Also, Russia’s good relations with Iran and Israel could lead to it playing a key role in mediating the Israeli-Iranian conflict. Especially since the United States welcomes Russia’s initiative to mediate in the conflict between Iran and Israel.
Russia can play a technical and logistical role in uranium (with host Iran’s enriched uranium reserves), the role of mediator or guarantor of the agreement, and even play the role of arbitrator in case of violation of the agreement. So, this arrangement and mechanism could potentially create a pivotal and decisive role for Russia in future equations and relations between the United States and Iran.
In the meantime, it seems that there are still significant challenges to reaching a new nuclear agreement between Iran and the United States.
One of the problems is the sometimes-contradictory statements of US officials. Many in Iran see the contradictions in the US positions as Washington’s strategy to eliminate Iran’s strategic nuclear capacity.
Implementing a “verification program” to ensure that Iran’s nuclear energy program is not being diverted is acceptable, but they do not accept the complete dismantling of Iran’s nuclear program. Also, the United States must be committed to ensuring Iran’s most important negotiating goal of lifting sanctions.
Therefore, Tehran may also want to suspend some of the pressure, phase out, and seek further assurances from Congress regarding the nuclear agreement with Iran (as a binding treaty for the United States). A large part of Iranian public opinion inside the country wants a difference between the country’s national and military interests and the demands of Economic and social. Therefore, Iran cannot practically show a large-scale retreat in the nuclear field.
Pursuing Iran’s nuclear program within the framework of its legal rights under the NPT, discussing concerns, and lifting sanctions in a tangible way for the people of Iran seem to be what Tehran is aiming for in the next negotiations. Tehran does not want the US cannot fulfill its commitments and the sanctions remain in place. Even in conditions of military conflict, diplomacy and playing the role of mediator actors should become worthwhile. Therefore, it is necessary to strive for win-win interests.
Although the impact of a wider conflict on the future of Tehran’s approach to nuclear negotiations remains unclear. But certainly, the continuation of the Iran-Israel war could make the chances of reaching a nuclear agreement less and less. In the meantime, it seems that Iran and the United States can still negotiate about the level of enrichment in Iran, verification of the uranium enrichment program, and inspections after the Iran-Israel conflict stops.
The most optimistic scenario is that the outcome of the negotiations is a comprehensive agreement. Another scenario is the possibility of reaching a limited agreement in areas such as controlling the level of uranium enrichment, strong international monitoring and verification, and lifting related sanctions.
Samyar Rostami, а political observer and senior researcher in international relations
