Iran’s nuclear semifinal

The recent three-day meeting of representatives of Iran and the Six (five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany) in Geneva became the second one after Hassan Rouhani was elected president in June.

Iran’s new president made it clear even during his election campaign that he intended to overcome the deadlock in the nuclear problem negotiation process. It was not that easy to achieve, since Iranian conservatives categorically disagree to make any concessions to the West in general, let alone the nuclear program.

President Rouhani experienced the dislike of conservatives himself in the form of acts of hooliganism against him, and also in numerous speeches of military leaders and MPs, who accused him of toadying to the West. However, Rouhani should be given his due for the gradual and consistent seeking of compromise with the West in this complex issue.

The reasons of such changes in the attitude of Tehran’s leadership are quite clear. The economic and financial sanctions, applied against Iran, have put the country on the verge of economic collapse. Oil production and export have decreased significantly. Former president Ahmadinejad’s government hoped that it would be possible to overcome the oil blockade with the help of India, China, and South Korea, who purchased large volumes of Iranian oil, have failed. Although oil export to these countries continued, it was of little use, since paying for it was impossible. Iran was kicked out of the international banking system, and sanctions were imposed on banks that engaged in financial activities with the country. In particular, India owes more than two billion dollars to Iran and is ready to pay, but cannot do it for technical reasons.

China did not enter the confrontation either and paid for Iranian oil by way of barter. As a result, Iran faces a bad deficit of currency, rial has depreciated rapidly, some enterprises started shutting down due to the lack of components. The petrochemical industry started experiencing the same problems, which enhanced the drop in the liquid fuel extraction. At the end of Ahmadinejad’s presidency, the deficit of essential goods, including food, plagued the country. Iranians still remember the shortage of chicken, which is a staple food for poorer citizens. It is remarkable that it had to be purchased from Venezuela, which in turn had to buy it from the neighboring Colombia, even though the two latter countries are in rather unfriendly relations.

In the conditions of increasing economic difficulties and the growth of public discontent, the new president was obliged to find a way to ease the sanctions. It was possible to do it only through finding common grounds with the West.

Basically, this was also what Europe and the US wanted.

Firstly, American diplomacy cannot boast of any success. The expected victory over Assad’s regime has gradually turned into a protracted war that will last until the full exhaustion of the parties. The budget problems affected the image of the administration within the country, and there are also mid-term elections to the Congress coming up. Their result is not too promising for Democrats at the moment.

Secondly, the Iranian nuclear issue became a stumbling block in relations with Israel and the Gulf monarchies, with Saudi Arabia in the first place. Their militancy and Tel Aviv’s threats, with Riyadh’s silent support, of stopping Iranian nuclear program by military means have put Washington in a very difficult position. Americans do not want to fight, but they cannot stay aside either. So, the compromise is needed in that sense as well.

Thirdly, of course, the sanctions have mostly hurt Iran, the European countries also suffered some losses. While the trade between Iran and the US is insignificant, it was rather extensive with Europe. So, the relaxation is also prompted by objective reasons of gradual recovery of trade.

The possibility of finding a compromise has significantly increased, with so much willingness from both parties.

Generally, negotiations in Geneva have revealed a lot of interesting things. Initially, the level of the negotiations had not been planned so high. They were supposed to take place with the participation of political directors or deputy ministers, but the Secretary of State John Kerry, his Western partners, and also Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov flew to Geneva.

Although the expected breakthrough was not reached, the evaluations of the parties suggest they were able to achieve a serious progress in overcoming disagreements during the three days in Geneva. According to Lavrov, negotiations were “very specific and long, but the time was not wasted.” And Russian’s assessment of the American party became a complete surprise: “I would like to note the leading role that was played by the US delegation headed by John Kerry on promoting the approaches that would be acceptable for Iran.” The UK foreign secretary William Hague was optimistic as well. According to him, an agreement with Tehran can be reached within a fortnight. London has already made a decision to restore diplomatic relations with Tehran.

France took a more restrained stand. Its Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius admitted in an interview to Radio France Internationale that there were discrepancies between the six UN members on two issues. Firstly, about the Iranian nuclear reactor Arak, which is being built. Paris thinks that it can produce military plutonium. Secondly, the countries did not agree on the allowed level of enriched uranium for Iran.

As expected, Israel has a negative attitude towards looking for a compromise with Iran and demands the full shutdown of its nuclear program. Israeli Economy Minister Naftali Bennet is paying an official visit to the US. He intends to ask the Congress members to use their influence on the White House to prevent the nuclear agreement with Iran, since it “poses a threat to Israel’s security.”

Iran has already made it clear that the proposal to completely give up enriched uranium is unacceptable. As President Rouhani stated after negotiations in Geneva: “There are red lines for us that cannot be crossed. They are determined by our right to enriched uranium in accordance with international regulations.”

Despite some negotiators’ certain optimism, reaching an agreement with Iran on its nuclear program is not going to be fast. The problem is too complicated. However, diplomacy is better than war. But it is even more important for the result to be positive in the end. Then the world will be able to breathe a sigh of relief.