On January 20th, the International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed that Iran had been implementing its commitments as part of the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) agreed with the so-called ‘E3+3’ in Geneva (also known as P5+1) on 24 November 2013. The forging of this interim deal, the successful start to its implementation and the temporary sanctions relief represent resounding success for international diplomacy but they should not be allowed to conceal the underlying issues. Reaching agreement on the JPA was achieved at the cost of clarity over what is to follow and it was decided to eschew a structured agreement in favour of a two-step process. The stated aim of the negotiating parties remains that of starting the implementation of a comprehensive solution by November 2014.
If agreement is not reached on a comprehensive solution by the expiry of the JPA by July 20th, the action plan can be renewed by mutual consent. The latter might well be the likeliest outcome of the forthcoming negotiations. Apart from the large gap between the E3+3 and Iranian positions on the substance of a final deal, several domestic policy constraints will likely define the parameters of what is achievable in the future.
The CEPS Policy Brief 'Next steps toward a final deal with Iran' argues that the best hope for success lies in continued engagement and consistent incremental progress in the negotiations, with structured concessions on both sides. This should occur, however, not in a two- but a three-step framework based on lengthening Iran’s ‘breakout’ period while re-engaging with the country both politically and economically. The EU is in a unique position to lead this process. Having greater flexibility than either the US or Iran, its main tasks will be that of maintaining the negotiating momentum and broadening dialogue with Iran.
WHAT IRAN WANTS IN 2014 (Reuters 8 January 2014):
TEHRAN – 'When I campaigned to become President of Iran, I promised to balance realism and the pursuit of the Islamic Republic’s ideals – and won Iranian voters’ support by a large margin. By virtue of the popular mandate that I received, I am committed to moderation and common sense, which is now guiding all of my government’s policies. That commitment led directly to the interim international agreement reached in November in Geneva on Iran’s nuclear program. It will continue to guide our decision-making in 2014.
Indeed, in terms of foreign policy, my government is discarding extreme approaches. We seek effective and constructive diplomatic relations and a focus on mutual confidence-building with our neighbors and other regional and international actors, thereby enabling us to orient our foreign policy toward economic development at home. To this end, we will work to eliminate tensions in our foreign relations and strengthen our ties with traditional and new partners alike. This obviously requires domestic consensus-building and transparent goal-setting – processes that are now underway.
While we will avoid confrontation and antagonism, we will also actively pursue our larger interests. But, given an increasingly interconnected and interdependent world, challenges can be addressed only through interaction and active cooperation among states. No country – including big powers – can effectively address on its own the challenges that it faces. Indeed, developing and emerging economies’ rapid “catch-up growth” suggests that their aggregate economic weight is about to surpass that of the advanced world. Today’s developing and emerging countries are likely to account for nearly 60% of world GDP by 2030, up from around 40% in 2000, enabling them to play a much greater role on the world stage.
In such a period of transition, Iran can enhance its global role. The election this year, in which close to 75% of eligible voters turned out, showed how our religious democracy is maturing. Iran’s ancient culture and civilization, long state continuity, geopolitical position, social stability amid regional turmoil, and well-educated youth enable us to look to the future with confidence, and aspire to assume the major global role that our people deserve – a role that no actor in global politics can ignore. We are also considering how to rebuild and improve our bilateral and multilateral relations with European and North American countries on the basis of mutual respect.
This requires easing tensions and implementing a comprehensive approach that includes economic ties. We can begin by avoiding any new strain in relations between Iran and the United States and, at the same time, endeavoring to eliminate inherited tensions that continue to mar relations between our countries. While we may not be able to forget the mistrust and suspicion that have haunted Iranians’ thinking about US governments for the last 60 years, now we must focus on the present and look to the future. That means rising above petty politics and leading, rather than following, pressure groups in our respective countries.
In our view, cooperating on issues of mutual interest and concern would contribute to easing tensions in our region as well. This means countering those in the US and our region who seek to distract international attention from issues in which they are directly involved and prevent Iran from enhancing its regional status. By diminishing the prospects for a permanent negotiated agreement on our nuclear program, such behavior increases the likelihood that the Iran-US standoff will continue.
Our region is grappling more than ever with sectarianism, group enmities, and potential new breeding grounds for extremism and terrorism. At the same time, the recent use of chemical weapons in Syria could haunt the region’s peoples for many years. We believe that, under such circumstances, a voice of moderation in the region could affect the course of events in a constructive and positive way. There is no doubt that the turmoil in nearby countries affects the interests of many regional and global actors, which need to act in concert to ensure long-term stability. Iran, as a major regional power, is fully prepared to move in this direction, sparing no effort to facilitate solutions. So those who portray Iran as a threat and thus seek to undermine its regional and global credibility should cease – in the interest of peace and tranquility in the region and beyond.
I am profoundly disturbed over the humanitarian tragedy in Syria and the enormous suffering that the Syrian people have endured for almost three years. Representing a people who have experienced the horror of chemical weapons, my government strongly condemned their use in the Syrian conflict. I am also concerned that parts of Syrian territory have become breeding grounds for extremist ideologies and rallying points for terrorists, which is reminiscent of the situation on our eastern border in the 1990’s. This is an issue of concern to many other countries as well, and finding a durable political solution in Syria requires cooperation and joint efforts.
So we are pleased that in 2013 diplomacy prevailed over threats of military intervention in Syria. We must build on this headway and understand that Syria is in dire need of coordinated regional and international efforts. We are ready to contribute to peace and stability in Syria in the course of serious negotiations among regional and extra-regional parties. Here, too, we need to prevent the talks from becoming a zero-sum game. That is no less true of Iran’s peaceful nuclear-energy program, which has been subject to enormous hype in recent decades. Since the early 1990’s, one prediction after another regarding how close Iran was to acquiring a nuclear bomb has proved baseless. Throughout this period, alarmists tried to paint Iran as a threat to the Middle East and the world.
We all know who the chief agitator is, and what purposes are to be served by hyping this issue. We know also that this claim fluctuates in proportion to the amount of international pressure to stop settlement construction and end the occupation of Palestinian lands. These false alarms continue, despite US national intelligence estimates according to which Iran has not decided to build a nuclear weapon. In fact, we are committed not to work toward developing and producing a nuclear bomb. As enunciated in the fatwa issued by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, we strongly believe that the development, production, stockpiling, and use of nuclear weapons are contrary to Islamic norms. We never even contemplated the option of acquiring nuclear weapons, because we believe that such weapons could undermine our national-security interests; as a result, they have no place in Iran’s security doctrine. Even the perception that Iran may develop nuclear weapons is detrimental to our security and overall national interest.
During my presidential campaign, I committed myself to doing everything in my power to fast-track a resolution to the standoff over our nuclear-energy program. To fulfill this commitment and benefit from the window of opportunity that the recent election opened, my government is prepared to leave no stone unturned in seeking a mutually acceptable permanent solution. Following up on November’s interim agreement, we are ready to continue to work with the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany) and others with a view to ensuring our nuclear program’s full transparency. The peaceful nuclear capability that we have achieved will be used within an internationally recognized framework of safeguards, and it will be accessible to multilateral monitoring by the International Atomic Energy Agency, as has been the case in the past several years. In this way, the international community can ensure the exclusively peaceful nature of our nuclear program.
We will never forgot our right to benefit from nuclear energy; but we are ready to work toward removing any ambiguity and answer any reasonable question about our program. The continuation of pressure, arm-twisting, intimidation, and measures aimed at cutting off Iranians’ access to a whole range of necessities – from technology to medicines and foodstuffs – can only poison the atmosphere and undermine the conditions needed to make progress. As we showed in 2013, Iran is fully prepared to engage seriously with the international community and to negotiate with our interlocutors in good faith. We hope that our counterparts, too, are ready to take advantage of this window of opportunity'.
On 15 November, at the Washington Ideas Form 2013, susan Rice discussed opposition to Iran talks: "it's premature to judge". The Atlantic reports: On Wednesday, Benjamin Netanyahu issued a warning to the international community. A bad deal on Iran's nuclear program, the Israeli prime minister cautioned in an address to the Israeli parliament, could lead to war. As U.S. National Security Adviser Susan Rice sees it, however, the Israeli leader is getting ahead of himself. "I think it's important that everybody understand what the deal is that needs to be reached and then they can make a judgment on its contours," Rice said this afternoon, during an interview with Walter Isaacson at the Washington Ideas Forum in Washington, D.C.
"You think [Netanyahu] doesn't understand the deal?" Isaacson asked. "Well it's not done, so by definition it's premature to judge it because the outlines have yet to be finalized." With an interim deal with Iran stalled, Rice attributed the gridlock to Iranian reservations, not French opposition, as some have reported. The French are "fully on board," she said. "Some of the reporting on this has been frankly misleading." "Rice also addressed friction with another longtime ally in the Middle East: Saudi Arabia. Ever since the Saudis took the stunning step in October of rejecting a seat on the U.N. Security Council—in protest over Western decisions to not intervene militarily in Syria and reach out diplomatically to Iran—speculation has mounted about just how frayed relations are between Washington and Riyadh. |
The Islamic Republic of Iran wants to resume dialogue with Europe: Exchanging views on international relations'
On August 4, a new President was inaugurated. Following statements, it seems that there is searching to improve relations with the West. "The government of wisdom and hope, as promised, will pursue national goals with a moderate policy designed to save the country's economy and revive ethical considerations and constructive interaction with the world" and
"I will prepare a "civil rights charter", restore the economy and improve rocky relations with the West."
It is likely that there is already a small step put by the Iranian embassy in the Netherlands. On the initiative of the Deputy Head of Mission of the Embassy of the I.R. of Iran there was an informal meeting 18 July 2013, together with the director of Feeling EUROPE Foundation and 2 representatives of Indonesia-Nederland Society, who accompanied, to exchange views. As said Mr. H. Rohani is sworn in as new President and because of this change of new horizons started to begin negotations and discussions. The I.R. of Iran wants itself going to bring more attention with also other aspects than just nuclear and asks for understanding, trust and respect.
The Deputy and present persons addressed openly and frankly with each other current and future developments within the country, in relations between the country and her neighbours and her relations to the world, Europe's position and role of mediator, events in MENA-countries, status of Balkan-countries, the state of the world, and ratio of the US. The concept is to improve Iran's conditions in 20 years.
The report that is made, 'The Islamic Republic of Iran wants to resume dialogue with Europe: Exchanging views on international relations', is a record of what has been talked, together with a brief consideration of promotion of international cooperation in the fifties at the time of the then UN Secretary-General Dag Hammarskjöld.
In the introduction is mentioned that 'Western sanctions (*) have caused a sharp currency depreciation, stagnant economy and rising unemployment in Iran.
In his campaign for Presidency promised Rouhani a moderate course, far from all extremism. He has announced to be for friendly and close relations with the surrounding neighbor countries, based on mutual respect and mutual interests. For a solution of the Atomic issue he calls for Iran's continued cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. According to Rouhani, the confused politics that Iran carried out so far, is the result of lack of information and lack of domestic political cooperation. Rouhani's call for moderation and political cooperation has succeeded in Iran. With more than 50% of the votes he now is elected Iran's new president.'
The Deputy Head of Mission of the Embassy of the I.R. of Iran announced: "The image of Iran in the West is not in line with reality The existing walls of mistrust in Western countries make real communication very difficult. The West’s suspicion of Iran preparing for nuclear weapons - how can we convince Europe and the United States that our nuclear programs are for peaceful means only, for energy plants and medical research? How can we break through the existing prejudices? In Islam constructing nuclear weaponry is ‘haram’, forbidden. We signed and ratified the Non Proliferation Treaty. We cooperated with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). We also offered to cooperate with other countries."
Both Feeling EUROPE Foundation and the 2 accompanying persons asked the core question 'when will the leaders reach out to I.R. of Iran? "There have been laborious situations in history in Europe and for Indonesia where there was distrust and disrespectful attitude, but leaders broke that vicious circle and
paved the way to cooperation and common prosperity."
At the end, it was agreed to consider further steps that can possibly be taken and was presented the paper 'Between idealism and realism.'
(*) A week earlier, 12 July, The Hague Center for Law and Arbitration presented a symposium on Unilateral Sanctions under International Law. The Symposium focused on one of the hottest topics affecting international commerce today, the unilateral imposition of sanctions. While views on the legality and legitimacy of these sanctions cover the entire spectrum of opinion, from staunch support to vociferous condemnation, one aspect which is universally recognized is the humanitarian impact, particularly of economic sanctions. |
|