Iran Denies Nuclear Talks Can Be Finalized In Hours
An Iranian foreign ministry official has rejected reports that the text of an agreement to salvage the 2015 nuclear deal could be finalized in the coming hours.
An Iranian foreign ministry official has rejected reports that the text of an agreement to salvage the 2015 nuclear deal could be finalized in the coming hours.
The Iranian government’s official news website IRNA quoted the unnamed official as saying that the talks are still underway on some important issues and that “we are not yet at a stage where we can talk about a finalized deal.”
“Given the continuation of discussions on some remaining important issues, we’re not yet at a stage to finalize the text. Iran has presented its constructive views to the other party so as to move forward and the result is up to their political decision,” the source said. “We believe that Vienna Talks can be concluded soon provided that the other party makes an appropriate decision. But we are not at that stage yet.”
He made the remarks in reaction to a Sunday report by The Wall Street Journal that cited the European Union's coordinator Enrique Mora as saying the negotiations to restore the JCPOA (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) are close to completion but it remained unclear whether Tehran will accept the final deal. The text of a deal could be closed in the coming hours, Mora had said.
However, Iran must still decide whether to set aside its demand that the nuclear deal can only be revived if a multiyear United Nations’ atomic agency safeguard probe into its nuclear program is closed, the report added, noting that “Several Western diplomats said Sunday that Tehran has doubled down on this condition in the past few days of talks and there is no agreement on the issue.”
Nasser Nobari, a former Iranian diplomat, told President Ebrahim Raisi in an open letter that Iran’s politico-economic interests would be best secured if the country adopted a foreign policy of “positive equilibrium and independent multilateralism” like India, that is, to maintain good relations with both The United States and Russia.
In a commentary entitled ‘Balanced Foreign Policy or Positive Balance Policy’ Saturday, Fars news agency slammed Nobari for suggesting the adoption of ‘positive equilibrium’ as the most suitable approach in Iran's foreign policy rather than the so-called ‘balanced foreign policy’ adopted by the government which excludes any relations with the US and focuses on relations with neighboring countries and the ‘East’.
“Does the said person believe … that the US is changing its Middle Eastern policy and wants to entice Iran [to have diplomatic relations] by increasing rapport with Iran and reliance on complex diplomacy towards the Zionist regime, Arab countries, and Iran?” the commentary asked.
It went on to stress that “the relationship between the World Arrogance (Western powers) led by the United States with the Islamic Republic is a zero- sum game … and will definitely not change”.
The Fars commentary went on to argue that relations with the United States would only be possible if its political system “collapses and gives way to an anti-imperialist or at least a non-Imperialist system”.
The policy of relying on Asia or the East, particularly China and Russia, was promulgated by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei in 2018, with the catchphrase, “Looking East”.
"We should look East, not West. Pinning our hope on the West or Europe would belittle us as we will have to beg them for favors and they will do nothing," Khamenei said in a speech in October 2018.
In his letter, Nobari who served as Iran’s ambassador to the Soviet in 1980s said the recent visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Iran, and the US envoy Robert Malley’s suggestion to Iran not to “opt for a position of relative dependency on Russia” indicate that both superpowers are eager to entice the Islamic Republic to choose them over the other.
“It is the first time in the past three centuries that Iran has and can make a choice and it's the superpowers that are competing with each other to bring Iran to their fold rather than dictating or imposing their decisions on Iran as they did in the Tehran Conference [during the 2nd World War],” he wrote.
The former diplomat also warned that not using this opportunity could constrain Iran’s influence in the international community and backfire as a threat.
A similar view was expressed recently by former senior conservative lawmaker, Ali Motahari, who said ‘Looking East’ should not be tantamount to distancing Iran from the West. “We need to maintain relations with both sides and take advantage of the rivalry between them. However, cutting all ties with the West would not serve the nation's interests," he said in an interview with Khabar Online.
The conservative Jomhouri Eslami newspaper on August 4 criticized the foreign ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani for being overjoyed by the recent quarrels between Beijing and Washington over Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan and taking sides with China.
“How does a neutral policy harm us in such disputes?”, an editorial in the newspaper asked. “Doesn't Neither East nor West mean not to take sides in the disputes between two domineering powers?”
‘Neither East nor West’ was the foreign policy approach promulgated by the founder of the Islamic Republic Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini and was Iran's official foreign policy motto until ‘Looking East’ took its place.
Heshmatollah Falahatpisheh told the moderate conservative news website Khabar Online in Tehran on Sunday, August 7, that it is only a US guarantee to lift the sanctions, and a guarantee that there would be no impediment to Iran’s oil exports, other trade and foreign investments .
The former conservative lawmaker who headed the foreign policy and national security committee of the parliament added that it is only with such a guarantee that a revived version of the JCPOA could be signed and put into effect.
According to Khabar Online, an agreement is still not within reach despite all the hopes expressed by Iranian and US officials at different times. Meanwhile, despite conflicting statements by Iranian officials, Iran's former nuclear chief Fereidoun Davani has said, "Iranian negotiators have so far withheld from the nation and the parliament what their preconditions for the revival of the JCPOA are," and that everything in the press about this is sheer speculation.
Falahatpisheh said that "Iran has spent a lot of money on developing its uranium enrichment infrastructure and shutting it down will be a waste. So, Iran deserves a bigger concession if it is to accept to limit its nuclear program at this stage. This bigger concession could be lifting the sanctions and guaranteeing the implementation of the resulting agreement."
He said that US President Joe Biden has access to five different tools to guarantee an agreement. These tools include an executive order that will allow him to circumvent possible opposition at the Congress. He added that such a guarantee should make sure that any new agreement signed after the revival of the JCPOA would not be subjected to new sanctions.
He went further by saying that US Presidents can do anything if pressured but did not say how Iran can exert that pressure on Biden. Meanwhile, Falahatpisheh did not respond to Khabar Online's question about whether Iran would be ready to modify its preconditions if the US president gives Tehran the guarantees it wants.
Yet the Iranian President, Ebrahim Raisi may have another idea about a guarantee. His deputy chief of staff for political affairs Mohammad Jamshidi wrote in an August 5 tweet: "In all recent telephone conversations between President Raisi and the Presidents of France, Russia and China, it was his firm position that ONLY when the so called Safeguard Issues is resolved and closed, can the final agreement be achieved."
Iranian officials have often also raised the question of receiving foreign investments, while some Iranian commentators have pointed out that Western governments cannot force or convince private companies to invest in a country if they deem the prevailing conditions as risky.
Several Khabar Online readers expressed concern in the comments section about whether it is safe to allow the Iranian government to receive billions of dollars if an agreement is reached. They said that eventually the government would channel the funds to its regional proxy groups.
Others said they were worried that some corrupt officials would embezzle released assets. Several other readers commented that the US government is not trustworthy, and an agreement made with the current government could be torpedoed by the next US administration.
