Interview with ILNA News Agency, June 30, 2023 -
The interview was in Persian and the translation below was done by Ai.
Sasan Karimi, an expert on diplomatic issues, said in an interview with an ILNA reporter about the inconclusiveness of the JCPOA revival talks in Doha, Qatar: It is a bit early to analyze. It is better to hear the comments of the parties that emerge from the negotiations independently, then we can provide a comprehensive analysis. In general, if what both sides say indicates the failure of these two days of negotiations and they do not say anything about continuing the negotiations now, it is worse than not going: this means that the situation in the negotiations has worsened since last week. But if they say that differences remain or say that work is progressing slowly but will continue in the coming weeks or the next few days, then the situation in the negotiations is better than last week.
He added: I think the problem that has arisen for the Americans is that the desirability of these negotiations for the Americans has decreased. Just as the importance of negotiations has increased for the Europeans due to the rise in energy prices, and for this reason, Mr. Borrell has increased his initiative, especially under pressure from France. But the Americans see no reason to show leniency.
Dr. Sasan Karimi said: On the other hand, Iran is in the same situation; that is, as if the economic incentives for the revival of the JCPOA could be more energy sales, easier bank transfers, the sale of oil from tankers on the water, and the recovery of blocked money. These things have been overshadowed by Iran’s distrust in the effectiveness of these negotiations and have also reduced Iran’s motivation. In addition, the high price of energy has increased Iran’s profit (i.e. financial benefit) in cash: the same amount that has been made easier in the export of oil, gas, and petrochemicals.
Karimi said: Today, the United States is not actually putting the pressure it was supposed to put on Iran according to Trump’s sanctions. Of course, this energy issue can be in the interest of both Iran and Venezuela, and I hope that we will not fall behind Venezuela in this regard. I do not believe that Russia’s opinion is decisive, but Russia’s interests are also in continuing the negotiations but not reaching a conclusion. These benefits have decreased, except for the Europeans, who usually play no role in international relations today except for normalization and do not have any negative or positive collusion.
In response to the question that one of the reasons why the negotiations are facing obstacles is the US insistence on the text of the Vienna VII plan. What is the nature of this issue that the US insists on, Karimi said: Given the approach of November and the mid-term parliamentary elections, I think it is unlikely that the situation will improve for us from the US side. This may be created for us through the war in Ukraine, energy prices or other levers, but it is unlikely that the US will find an incentive to show more flexibility through this. In the eighth round, we were very close to confrontation. Now they say that the US has insisted on its seventh round text, which does not include lifting sanctions on the IRGC and guarantees.
He continued: As we have heard in the past three days, Iran has been lenient on its request to remove the IRGC from the terrorist list, but it has demanded economic guarantees, as if the Americans will not be burdened economically. All of these issues are in the context of what is the motivation of the Americans for such an agreement at this time, for which they must be accountable to the parliament and in the elections. They must also answer to their regional partners. This means that there is not much motivation and there are many counter-motivations.
In response to the question of whether the United States will continue to insist on its demands in the negotiations or will it back down from its demands, Karimi also said: The US is unlikely to show leniency. But so far, Iran has shown leniency on the IRGC issue. This means that Iran has paid its share of leniency. Iran also says that if we make an agreement that is formal and not economic, it will not be useful to Iran. But I do not know what Iran means by the guarantee in the contract? If it means a political and legal guarantee, it cannot be more than a Security Council resolution.
He added: From an economic perspective, I think it is unlikely that Iran will back down. I think it is unlikely that the other party will put anything as a guarantee. There is nothing as a guarantee in the international environment. Rather, by normalizing the agreement that has been made and making it efficient, we will get the international environment used to using and relying on it. This did not happen during the JCPOA period due to what Mr. Trump did.
But if the world gets used to interacting based on an agreement, it will invest, and the best agreement will be to be able to export energy to Europe. This is an operational guarantee, not a guarantee on paper. Of course, this requires that the agreement becomes outdated and time passes before it can increase its reliability.
ILNA Link
File
