WarSclerotic

The two-day nuclear talks between Iran and the West, the first formal negotiations since the election of Iranian President Hassan Rowhani, resumed this week in Geneva. One promise of Rowhani’s presidency was to reach an agreement with the West on Iran’s nuclear program in an effort to ease West-imposed economic sanctions and put an end to the country’s prolonged economic isolation. The Rowhani administration has pledged to offer a proposal that addresses all the concerns on Iranian nuclear facilities, activities, and enrichment as well as to smooth Tehran’s international relations.

The talks in Geneva, held on Tuesday and Wednesday, involved representatives of Iran, primarily Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, and the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (Britain, China, France, Russia and the United States) including Germany, known as the P5+1 group.

The U.S.-educated foreign minister, Zarif outlined a proposal— by speaking in English and using PowerPoint— to representatives of the world powers. The major question though, is how the West and Iran have perceived the nuclear talks, and if the discussions signal a positive, optimistic political and diplomatic move?

Highly positive atmosphere?

The first crucial point is that Iranian authorities did not hesitate in rushing to call their outline a positive success. Araqchi and the spokesman for the Iranian team stated after the negotiations that “serious” talks were conducted in a “highly positive atmosphere.”

Iranian officials pointed out that they sought to keep the details of Iran’s proposal confidential for the time being, a Machiavellian move by Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif

 

Majid Rafizadeh

However, beyond these political polemics and posturing, Iran finds it imperative to spread the narrative that the nuclear talks were successful. Economically speaking, Tehran is in a complicated situation, urging Iranian authorities to depict a positive picture domestically (to appeal to their constituents and parliament) and regionally for their neighbors’ concerns over Tehran’s clandestine nuclear activities and hegemonic ambitions. Tehran also seeks to portray a positive image globally to alleviate Tehran’s unprecedented level of isolation.

The World Bank has pointed out that sanctions pushed Iran into an economic recession last year. Accordingly, between March 2012 and March 2013, the Iranian currency, the Rial, lost an estimated 80 percent of its value against the U.S. dollar. This has led to an increase in domestic prices as well as high inflation. Tehran’s oil exports have decreased from roughly 2.5 million barrels to less than a million. The number of declared bankruptcies in the nation has increased, with many factories operating at less than half capacity due to their inability to import many of their supplies. The combinations of all these factors have endangered the ayatollahs’ and ruling clerics’ hold on power.

To address these domestic economic concerns, the frustration of the ordinary Iranian people with the system, as well as Tehran’s trade and diplomatic isolation, Iranian authorities find it critical to send a message to the region and other countries that the two-day nuclear talks in Geneva were effective and successful. Firstly, President Rowhani can show the Iranian people that he has stuck with some of the pledges he made, aiming to increase Tehran’s oil sales and exports, avoiding the possibility of double recession, and removing any potential risks against the government’s hold on power and a change in the status quo of the political structure. Nevertheless, whether the proposal meets the requirements remains to be seen.

The nuances of the two-day talks

Iranian officials pointed out that they sought to keep the details of Iran’s proposal confidential for the time being, a masterful and Machiavellian move by Zarif, Rowhani, and the rest of team. The confidentiality and secrecy of Iran’s proposal will allow less scrutiny from other countries, scholars, analysts, journalists, politicians, and political scientists.

This issue particularly manifests itself in case of the Israeli reaction to the talks and to the new Iranian administration’s charm offensive, softening tone, and diplomatic outreach to the United States and Western allies. On Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said in reference to the current nuclear talks and sanctions that it would be “a historical mistake” to lift them, and it would be a mistake to ease pressure on Tehran. Netanyahu added that any action to let up on the Iranian government would only buttress and strengthen Tehran’s “uncompromising elements.” He pointed out that the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei “will be perceived as the winner.”

Although the Iranian leaders desired to keep their plans secrets, several issues have become clear from Araqchi’s statements, reports by Iranian Students’ News Agency (ISNA).

Despite pressure from the United Nations Security Council members, and despite calls for Tehran to suspend its nuclear enrichment, the Iranian government has clearly pointed out that it should have the right to enrich uranium and that the nation will continue spinning the centrifuges. Tehran will not suspend its nuclear activities, as the talks between Iran, P5+1 and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are ongoing.

Finally, from the perspective of the Iranian leaders, the two-day talks were a definite success, specifically when several Western diplomats, including Michael Mann, a spokesman for Catherine Ashton (the European Union’s top foreign policy official and the lead negotiator in the talks with Tehran), pointed out that the Iranian proposal had been “very useful.”

However, the major issue is whether Tehran will be willing to take further steps, particularly at a time when the nation has acquired significant nuclear technological gains. Iran’s nuclear abilities have advanced considerably since 2011, and many experts point out that Tehran has the capacity to quickly produce a nuclear weapon considering the fact that Iran has increased thousands of advanced centrifuges and that Iranian engineers are working on a plant that will produce plutonium. Tehran has made it more difficult for the West to increase its sanctions and further isolate Iran. Nevertheless, it remains to be seen whether the next steps in the negotiation process would ease the existing sanctions and prevent Tehran from having nuclear weapons’ capabilities.
_____________________________

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is an Iranian-American scholar, author and U.S. foreign policy specialist. Rafizadeh is the president of the International American Council. He serves on the board of Harvard International Review at Harvard University and Harvard International Relations Council. He is a member of the Gulf 2000 Project at Columbia University, School of International and Public Affairs. Previously he served as ambassador to the National Iranian-American Council based in Washington, DC.

No one thought that the relations between Egypt and “Mommy America” would be strained; the contrary was supposed to happen. Relations with Washington were expected to deteriorate when the Muslim Brotherhood rose to power, not after their ouster.

Egyptian Foreign Minister Nabil Fahmy confirmed the tense relations between the two countries. Is it a storm in a teacup? The new Egyptian leadership invokes history and the Cold War’s symbols of hostility with the United States by refining the image of former leader Gamal Abdel Nasser. The Americans did not only criticize Egyptian authorities, they also cut military aid. This is considered a political message and is more important than the financial impact of the move.

Dignity

The dispute may last for a year, until the end of the legislative elections. The Egyptian presidential elections might be extended and take a lot of time if each party escalates the political conflict. The cut in aid is a big mistake by the Americans because they have offended the personal and patriotic pride in Egypt. It is clear that the Egyptian leadership is criticizing Washington from a wounded stance, which affected their dignity more than their politics. The U.S. government, which started courting Iran and negotiating with the Taliban, is now waging wars against its friends here; Bahrain, Saudi Arabia and Egypt. The U.S. is dealing with Egypt, which is the largest Arab country and is larger than Iran, as if it was a small country.

If the U.S. government had shown some courage in Iraq, as it is doing in Egypt today, it would have probably been able to say that Americans are consistent in their policy

 

Abdulrahman al-Rashed

The region is holding the U.S. accountable for its actions. It believes that Washington is asking Arabs to buy tickets to attend electoral contests, engage in the democratic system and, in the end, Washington will sidestep the consequences.

In Iraq, for example, the United States has conducted the largest operation to establish democracy in the region. It spent millions of dollars for millions of Iraqis to vote with their fingers dyed in purple ink. Thus, a new government was born, however, it was similar to the regime of Saddam Hussein. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, who has been ruling since 2006, turned into a dictator who runs the whole country from his office. He manages security services, prisons, the army, intelligence services, and the finance system. The parliament and the government no longer have any value. Maliki decides on the oil contracts, arms and state projects. He signs execution decrees and accuses his political opponents to the point that many of them are either dead or fleeing the country to avoid persecution.

If the U.S. government had shown some courage in Iraq, as it is doing in Egypt today, it would have probably been able to say that Americans are consistent in their policy. However, it is actually doing the opposite. In Egypt, the U.S. did not punish the government when the Brotherhood prevented courts from being convened, tried to disable the judiciary, persecuted the media and decided to control the entire regime, not only the government. If Washington was really interested in democracy, it would have demonstrated that through its foreign policy. It is not possible to remain silent regarding the heinous violations of the democratic regime in Iraq, but at the same time pursue Egypt with sanctions.

Of course, this does not save the Egyptian side from being blamed regarding its excessive sensitivity towards Washington’s stance. The American political system does not resemble the Arab political system which is ruled by one single person. In the U.S., the state has more than one voice and decisions are made by multiple parties. The positions of the Congress do not reflect those of the White House, or those of other state institutions and civil society.
____________________________

Abdulrahman al-Rashed is the General Manager of Al Arabiya News Channel. A veteran and internationally acclaimed journalist, he is a former editor-in-chief of the London-based leading Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, where he still regularly writes a political column. He has also served as the editor of Asharq al-Awsat’s sister publication, al-Majalla. Throughout his career, Rashed has interviewed several world leaders, with his articles garnering worldwide recognition, and he has successfully led Al Arabiya to the highly regarded, thriving and influential position it is in today.