Taking political risks and settling for less than you want

Mohammad Lotfollahi of the Iranian newspaper Etemad asked questions. I replied on Thursday:

Q: Iran, the P5 + 1 and the United States will begin talks on reviving the nuclear deal in late November.  What do you think is the main reason for the ineffectiveness of the previous six rounds of talks?

A: Iran has wanted firm guarantees that the US would never again leave the agreement. No US government can guarantee that, except by ratification of an agreement in the Senate, which political circumstances do not permit. The US has wanted Iran to agree to talk about regional issues, which Tehran has been unwilling to do.

Q: Many in the media have criticized Iran for delaying its return to talks, but while Biden continues to pursue of maximum pressure policy, everyone has forgotten about Trump’s withdrawal from the deal. Isn’t America to blame for the current situation?

A: Yes. I don’t think anyone doubts that Trump’s withdrawal is the cause of the difficult current situation.

Q: One of the stories often repeated by opponents of the JCPOA is that it offered “maximum concessions” and led to a “bonanza” for Iran. How do you see JCPOA? Is this still a win-win agreement for everyone?

A: Iran did get serious benefits from the deal, which were cancelled when the US withdrew. The EU, US, Russia, and China also benefited. I believe it was a win-win.

Q: The United States wants Iran to be flexible in its negotiations. But in practice, it does not show any flexibility under the pretext of democracy and separation of powers in America. Doesn’t this hurt the negotiations?

A: It may, but you can’t convince the US to give up democracy and separation of powers.

Q: Is there basically an agreement that both major US parties agree on?

A: No, not so far as I can see. The Republicans are mostly committed to maximum pressure, which hasn’t worked. The Democrats liked the original deal, which was working.

Q: How much does the element of time affect the success of future negotiations? Are the concerns about losing the JCPOA non-proliferation benefit if the negotiation process is prolonged real and serious?

A: Yes. Iran is acquiring know-how, especially for enrichment of uranium, that it will be impossible to erase. Delay is the enemy of nonproliferation.

Q: What is your proposal to get out of the current impasse? Is there a way to defuse tensions and reach an agreement?

A: Sure there is. Both sides will have to settle for less than they want and take political risks in doing so.

Q: Israel threatens to launch a military attack on Iran. Israel even has nuclear weapons and is not a member of the NPT. Isn’t the West’s attitude towards Iran and Israel an example of a double standard?

Q: The entire nonproliferation regime is based on a distinction between nuclear and non-nuclear states. Iran chose to sign the Non Proliferation Treaty as a non-nuclear-weapons state. Israel has not signed it. Both exercised their sovereign rights, presumably because the choices they made best served their national interests. Tehran continues to say it will never develop nuclear weapons. The main issue is ensuring verification of that commitment. Israel has no obligation to verification one way or the other.