Optics of peace first, details later: The US-Iran 60-day challenge
Negotiators will have to grapple with issues that have plagued US-Iran diplomacy for decades – and while a technical compromise is possible, the bigger challenge
Negotiators will have to grapple with issues that have plagued US-Iran diplomacy for decades – and while a technical compromise is possible, the bigger challenge is political, say analysts. The wedding ceremony has taken place, but the ring has yet to appear. That’s the assessment of observers on Monday’s announcement of a breakthrough “deal-to-do-a-deal” between the United States and Iran after more than 100 days of war that began with US-Israeli strikes on Tehran on February 28. The agreement to end hostilities and begin a 60-day negotiation process on a number of pre-agreed key issues has been welcomed in a region desperate for stability. Gulf states can breathe a sigh of relief after months of uncertainty and Iranian bombing of US military assets and infrastructure on their territories, Lebanon has a glimmer of hope, despite continuing attacks by Israeli which has occupied nearly one-fifth of its territory, and global markets have welcomed the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and falling oil prices after weeks of disruption. The full text of the agreement, expected to be formally signed in Geneva on Friday, has not yet been released, however, mostly third-hand accounts of what is actually in it have conflicted over the past few days. But the big story is not what has been agreed to, but rather what has been deferred. According to Iran’s Mehr News Agency, the draft agreement gives the two sides 60 days to reach a final settlement on the issue of Iran’s nuclear programme and what to do with its 440kg (970-pound) stockpile of highly enriched uranium. During that period, $24bn in frozen Iranian assets are set to be released, the news agency has reported. The US has not confirmed any of this, however. Discussions concerning Iran’s missile programme and its support for proxy armed groups in the region have been removed from the negotiating agenda, the agency added, despite US demands at the start of the war. The result is an agreement that ends the war – for now – but postpones most of the key disagreements that triggered it in the first place. “Nothing substantive has been negotiated yet on the nuclear programme,” Maneli Mirkhan, a strategic adviser on Iran and global affairs, told Al Jazeera. “The memorandum is a framework for opening negotiations, not the result of them.” Over the next two months, then, negotiators will have to grapple with some of the most difficult questions that have plagued US-Iran diplomacy for decades: whether Iran will be allowed to continue enriching uranium, what happens to its stockpile of highly enriched uranium, how intrusive international inspections will be, and when sanctions relief should be delivered. While analysts say a technical compromise is possible, the bigger challenge is political. The nuclear file: What still needs negotiating? The core issue is the future of Iran’s nuclear programme, which has bedevilled negotiations between Tehran and Washington for decades. A chasm between the two sides on the topic has already appeared with US Vice President Vance telling US media this week that nuclear inspectors will be allowed back into Iran to help it “destroy the highly enriched stockpile”, and touting this as a core part of the agreement being signed on Friday. Iranian officials, however, say negotiations about Iran’s nuclear programme will only begin after the initial agreement is signed on Friday, making no mention of inspectors or the fate of the uranium stockpile. At the heart of this particular aspect of the dispute is a longstanding disagreement over the purpose of Iran’s nuclear programme, according to Seyed Hossein Mousavian, an Iranian policymaker and former diplomat who served on Tehran’s nuclear negotiating team in talks with the European Union and the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The BriefWire