The Final Stretch for Nuclear Negotiations

With the July 20 deadline looming ahead for Iran’s negotiators and the P+5 group of countries to reach a final agreement on Iran’s nuclear program, the Iranian team looks like it’s ready to do business. And if small details are telling, the fact that Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who arrived in Vienna Friday, will stay in Europe for a full two weeks suggests that Iran is determined to see the talks through.

Though the battle between the administration of President Hassan Rouhani and his hardliners opponents will rage regardless, it is also noteworthy that in recent weeks there has been a certain level of agreement across the contested lines. Whether its Foreign Minister Zarif reminding the public that the Rouhani administration is committed to protecting the integrity of Iran’s nuclear program, or hardline politicians who accuse the U.S. of hypocrisy, all Iranian officials seem to agree on one thing: if negotiations fail, America is to blame. This shared conviction has had some unifying power, however slight.

State-run news agency IRNA cast an optimistic light on the prospective success of the negotiations this week, talking to prominent politicians and nuclear experts who felt that a Vienna agreement could also help discussions around what action needed to be taken over ISIS militants in Iraq.

Last week, Iran agreed to scale down its nuclear program. But key negotiator Abbas Araghchi made it clear that this must apply to a very specific, limited time period and that terms must be transparent. The number of centrifuges kept in commission is still to be agreed. “We are ready to provide guarantees on the exclusively peaceful nature of our nuclear program. But we will not give up, and we will not make a mockery of our technological advances or our scientists,” Foreign Minister Zarif wrote in the French daily Le Monde. And in his “We can make history” speech, posted to YouTube, Zarif reminded the world that Iran will not “kneel in submission”. 

U.S. Plans for Sabotage

But Iran’s conservative politicians, from former nuclear negotiators to some of the Supreme Leader’s key advisors, continue to be skeptical—if not outright hostile—to doing deals with the P5+1 group, made up of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council and Germany. For them, and for the hardline media that peddles their views, negotiations amount to Iran conceding control over one of its most precious industries and potential for scientific advancement, while the West makes no compromises whatsoever. Hardliner Mohammad Saleh Jokar, who sits on the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission, summed it up nicely: “the Americans will sabotage talks by demanding too much.” 

Not only does the U.S. intend to ruin negotiations, another skeptic said, once a deal collapses, they will cast Iran as the villain. “It is the Americans who want the negotiations to reach an impasse,” said Naghavi Hosseini,  speaking on behalf of the commission. For some, any optimism about what will come out of the Vienna talks is simply misplaced: “I don’t believe in a win-win situation,” said political analyst Foad Izadi. “The U.S. and a couple of other 5+1 countries have made it clear that they want to bring down Iran.”

On Monday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry wrote in The Washington Post that Iran's "public optimism about the potential outcome of these negotiations has not been matched, to date, by the positions they have articulated behind closed doors.” He added that “The United States and our partners have demonstrated to Iran how serious we are. Now Iran must choose.”

Representatives from the P5+1 nations also face criticism from among their own ranks. In some cases, critics from the West sound remarkably like those complaining in Iran, with the blame being reversed: the West has been reasonable, and Iran’s demands for thousands of active centrifuges reveals a hidden agenda.  British Foreign Secretary William Hague said, "A deal that does not provide sufficient assurances that Iran will not develop a nuclear weapon is not in the interests of the UK, the region or the international community.” Undoubtedly, Izadi and others who call for Iran’s nuclear negotiators to adopt a tough stance when dealing with the West consider the UK as one of the countries that “want to bring down Iran”.

Kerry’s comments did not go down well in Iran. In an article on the Maghreb News website, which has close ties to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, one hardliner wrote that this sort of sentiment revealed just how unwilling the United States was to enter into anything resembling acceptable negotiations.

Peace, but no loss of face

President Rouhani’s administration is keen to show that its negotiating tactics have been in step with Ayatollah Khamenei, and that those engaging with the international community are remaining tough, resilient, and focused on what’s best for Iran and its future. On Tuesday, the president assured the public that the negotiating team “is experienced and knowledgeable enough to talk to the six countries that face us. They know how to negotiate.”

Iran is driving the agenda in Vienna, Zarif’s deputy Abbas Aragachi told the public. “We have built confidence so as to assure the other side that our peaceful nuclear program would not be used for military purposes. The other side will present this as its own victory, claiming that it has prevented Iran from building a nuclear bomb.”

Some have dismissed the significance of the July 20 deadline. On Tuesday, a senior member of the negotiating team told news agency IRNA that negotiations could be extended if they didn’t suit Iran at this stage.

Yet, all things considered, there seems to have been a shift in the political atmosphere in Tehran. A confidence is building, and the conversation has relaxed. Where hardliners once adopted a blanket approach to negotiations, today’s red lines look sharper and more discernible, with everybody agreeing technological advancement should not be given up to satisfy Western anxieties.

Could it be that Iran is more willing to accept a nuclear agreement, even where hardliners are concerned? Part of this, of course, is about where the real power lies: if Ayatollah Khamenei believes his power can be further bolstered by ushering in an agreement, that is what will happen.

The new attitude doesn’t exactly guarantee a happy ending, but it just might represent a new chapter in Iran’s foreign relations, and a somewhat happier beginning.