Interview with ILNA News Agency October 6, 2023 -
In an interview with ILNA, international affairs analyst Sasan Karimi, in response to the question that so far three proposals from Oman, Japan, and September are on the table of negotiators regarding an agreement with the West. What issues do these proposals raise? Is it related to the revival of the JCPOA, the lifting of sanctions, or a new agreement independent of the JCPOA? He said: Yes. Apparently, all the initiatives are aimed at returning all parties to implementing the JCPOA obligations. According to various actors on the international stage, there is no real solution to resolve the tension on the nuclear issue other than the JCPOA. Because no party wants to have more data and fewer outputs from it. Incidentally, now that time has passed, it seems that everyone, especially the various critics of the JCPOA, have come to the conclusion that this issue cannot be easily “agreed upon” in any other way.
He added: “The West’s desire to prevent Iran’s nuclear program through military action is a matter of course, but it is not an agreement. On the other hand, the fact that Iran does not care at all whether it is subject to sanctions and isolation or is placed under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter as a threat to international peace and security is another basis for calculation. But if the issue is to reach a point with an agreement where no one is concerned about Iran’s nuclear program, and there is a real plan that meets our needs, and international sanctions, Chapter 7, unilateral sanctions, and as a result, isolation are eliminated, a better agreement than the JCPOA has not been and is not practically possible. Therefore, as soon as someone is supposed to take action to “resolve the issue through diplomacy” and reach a conclusion, they will realize the difficulty of writing an agreement.” Otherwise, mere negative criticism is the easiest thing to do.
In response to the question that October 18 is the end of one of the sunset clauses that will end the arms embargo and sanctions on individuals, but given that the European Troika announced that these sanctions should remain in place, what steps should Iran take to make this clause operational, Karimi said: From a legal perspective, as long as the JCPOA dispute resolution mechanism (snapback) has not been activated and the agreement is currently being implemented, its sunsets will be implemented from a legal perspective, and this is an extremely unlikely thing that the Western parties have accepted. But what the Europeans are saying is actually a violation of the JCPOA, which of course is always conceivable and from the side of all parties to the agreement.
This foreign policy analyst reminded: The JCPOA is an agreement based on voluntary actions for all parties, and everyone is obligated to remain in the JCPOA or implement its provisions. In addition, the international environment is basically an authoritarian environment, except in very limited cases (which, incidentally, include resolutions under Chapter VII and other cases such as mass killings, etc. that fall under the principle of universal jurisdiction), governments cannot be forced to do anything unless they themselves agree to the mechanism used.
He added: Therefore, on the evening of October 18 of this year, it will be done in the current conditions and the arms embargoes mentioned will be lifted from a legal perspective. But whether Europe wants to maintain or renew its arms embargoes by violating the JCPOA is another matter. At present, we ourselves are not fulfilling the JCPOA obligations (including the enrichment level and JCPOA inspections), although of course our actions are under Articles 26 and 36 of the JCPOA and not a violation of the agreement. However, in any case, fulfilling obligations or not in general in the international environment is largely based on the political will of governments, and a government cannot simply be forced to do something. It has been like this until now and will continue to be like this. Therefore, one cannot seek legal guarantees for the implementation of an agreement in the international environment. Such an expectation is only due to a misconception in the international environment and its failure to recognize it, and these perceptual errors are extremely harmful. Whether in destroying an agreement that has been made, such as the JCPOA, or when they prevent the implementation of an agreement. The only guarantee for international agreements is the obsolescence of their implementation, the countries getting used to implementing it, and especially conducting mutual trade and investments, so that mutual interests are mutually involved.
In response to the question of what conditions the indirect negotiations between Iran and the United States currently have, Karimi said: It seems that the Biden administration's calculations in this regard are reversed. For them, any return to the JCPOA in American domestic politics, especially during the elections, is a closed and incalculable matter. Therefore, the Biden administration sought to prevent any further tension on issues related to Iran and to reassure itself that it seems to have achieved this goal with a kind of verbal and informal agreement. So what was desired for the US has been achieved. The issue of enrichment and other nuclear dimensions also seems to have become clear to them, and they are no longer making excuses for these issues as they used to, and they are no longer presenting Iran as suspected of building nuclear weapons, because basically, after all these years, such an argument does not have many buyers in elite circles or in public opinion.
In response to the question that in the meantime, we are witnessing that some Persian-language media outlets are seeking to undermine the negotiations in different reports. It seems that this time a movement is seeking a new security game against Iran, claiming to have influence over the US foreign policy apparatus. What is your assessment of the sabotage, he said: The fact is that track two diplomacy is a well-known thing in diplomacy, and basically, this is the main part of the work of think tanks all over the world, especially in cases where direct diplomacy has more sensitivities and difficulties. At the same time, it has been a constant reality that throughout the entire time, extremists on all sides who oppose any attempt to reach a middle solution try to present these informal bargaining as a form of infiltration and espionage, etc., and use words like “disclosure,” etc. The goal they pursue is to denigrate individuals and institutions that have been formed and can be effective. It should be noted that these cases are always carried out in coordination with governments, and are basically intended to establish an indirect and substantive dialogue between governments that is typically impossible to do at the official negotiating table. Therefore, this information is by no means new to governments. But at the same time, such pressures will cause them to be conservative in future cases, as these types of activists and media, who are clearly the propaganda apparatus of certain governments and regimes and receive their endless resources from them, also have the same intention.
Karimi said: "For a diplomat and a diplomatic apparatus, it is important to be able to reach the best possible (not impossible) point on the issue under discussion. It does not matter which way this is possible. Sometimes these things need to be done through official or unofficial, overt or covert means, and this is not at all strange. Incidentally, it is surprising that those who constantly want to stir up controversy and consider it a matter of moral and immorality to be a reason for themselves. In any case, if such an incident existed, its creators should be thanked for their up-to-dateness in all-round diplomatic activism." He clarified: "I see these incidents as the completion of an incident that attempted to undermine Robert Malley's line and prevent any possibility of a real solution to the issue at an official and public level. This line seeks to bring extremists to power in the United States and revive maximum pressure on Iran, which will bring them the greatest short-term and long-term benefits."
ILNA Link
File
