US Spokesman Defends Iran Nuclear Talks As ‘Consultations’ Continue

Some of the opinions expressed in an interview by Saeed Laylaz, an economic columnist turned politician, were so controversial that that the Etemad newspaper in a rare move had to distance itself from it and put a disclaimer saying, the opinions expressed were totally those of the interviewee and did not necessarily conform to the views of the daily's editors.

Laylaz said among other things that "Peace comes out of gun barrels, not out of agreements," and opined that "the know-how of making nuclear bombs is Iran's geopolitical shield." Meanwhile, he said that "all possible achievements of an agreement about the revival of the 2015 nuclear deal would be temporary."

Meanwhile, a prominent reformist politician, Former Deputy Foreign Minister Mohsen Aminzadeh told the daily's website, Etemad Online, that mainstream reformists in Iran disagree with Laylaz and believe in an agreement with the United States.

Laylaz said that the revival of the JCPOA in its current form is not in the interest of the Islamic Republic. "I hope the Iranian side refuses to sign the JCPOA," he said, adding that a temporary agreement is the best substitute for the JCPOA.

In one of the most controversial parts of the interview, Laylaz said that "Under the current circumstances an Iran capable of making nuclear bombs would be a safer country."

Meanwhile, expounding on the Islamic Republic's ongoing economic crisis, he said that good governance and a campaign against financial corruption will solve the country's problems. Laylaz attributed Iran's economic vows to mismanagement rather than the impact of US sanctions and said some of the cases of financial corruption in Iran are tantamount to outright theft. Laylaz attributed 80 percent of Iran's economic problems to financial corruption.

However, he acknowledged that former US President Donald Trump's withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran has had a devastating impact worse than the Mongol invasion of Persia. He added that even the current US administration is aware that the next administration will most certainly nullify any agreement with Iran.

Laylaz said Iran wants the agreement with the United States for two purposes: An economic purpose and a security purpose. But an agreement with the US will not serve any one of these two purposes. From an economic point of view, the West is not going to give any technology to Iran as long as Iran is a revolutionary Islamic country. He added: "In a country from where around $20 billions of capital exits every year, it is foolish to look for $2 billion dollars of foreign investment. We need to prevent the flight of capital from Iran."

Meanwhile, he argued that as soon as Iran signs an agreement with the West, the price of oil will come down, denying Iran any gain from a possible agreement. He added that even with an agreement, Iran's economic problems will reoccur within 6 months.

Laylaz also opined that in terms of security, an agreement will not solve Iran's problems because the West does not want a revolutionary Iran, while reaching a nuclear weapons capability will provide the deterrence Iran needs.

Asked what happens if Iran refuses to sign an agreement and its nuclear case goes to the UN Security Council? Laylaz said, "nothing will happen to Iran as long as Russia and China are UNSC member states. We should not be afraid of the trigger mechanism in the JCPOA. Let me tell you, this gun has no trigger. The United States has already tried everything against Iran, all in vain."

Two years after hardliner-majority parliament, against the advice of then President Hassan Rouhani, passed legislation expanding the nuclear program and reducing cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency, there was general support for Iranian negotiators.

The official news agency quoted leading deputy Vali Esmaili that the parliament, convened in closed session, had no need to approve any terms agreed over restoring the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Acton). “Full authority,” had been given to the negotiating team led by Bagheri Kani, said Esmaili.

Claiming victory on Wednesday Abolfazl Amuee, spokesman of the parliament’s foreign policy and security committee, said “the other side” had “accepted the Islamic Republic’s arguments on verification of lifting of sanctions and providing guarantees, and the essence of our country’s nuclear capabilities will be preserved.”

The Supreme National Security Council met Monday to approve Iran’s written response, given later that day, to a European Union text circulated August 8 as EU mediator Enrique Mora tried to conclude 16-months of talks between Iran and world powers aimed at reviving the JCPOA. The United States left the deal in 2018 and limits Iran began exceeding its nuclear limits in 2019.

SNSC secretary Ali Shamkhani appeared in parliament alongside Amir-Abdollahian and Bagheri Kani. He told parliament what had been achieved in the talks was built on the parliamentary legislation of 2020.

Esmaili urged the US and “the west” to “give the right answer to the package proposed by Iran.” A positive, if cautious response from the EU to the Iranian text, has encouraged hopes over JCPOA revival.

Steps to agreement ‘underway’

Vahid Jalalzadeh, head of parliament’s National Security Commission, said Iran was ready to agree once its interests were met, while Abbas Moghtadaei, another deputy, said steps towards agreement were “underway and negotiations have ended.”

The Iranian parliament approved the JCPOA back in 2015, despite the opposition of many members. While the number of deputies opposing, or critical of, the agreement has increased since then, the united front presented by Amir-Abdollahian and Bagheri Kani, both appointed by President Ebrahim Raisi, and the SNSC endorsement have shifted the mood.

Oil prices dropped Tuesday and Wednesday, partly as traders detected a more positive tone around the nuclear talks, which could release hundreds of thousands of barrels a day of Iranian oil from storage onto world markets. Under its ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions since 2018, the US has curbed Iran’s oil exports by threatening punitive action against buyers.

Positive assessment

With diplomats refusing to reveal details of the August 8 EU text or of the Iranian response, reports have offered differing explanations of what remains at issue. Iranian media and Mohammad Marandi, spokesman for the Iranian negotiators, said Tuesday that Tehran was still seeking guarantees it would be cushioned – both in terms of its economy and nuclear program – against any future US decision to again leave the agreement.

Defending the approach of the Biden administration Tuesday, State Department Spokesman Ned Price referred to “complex issues.” With vocal opposition in the US Congress to the JCPOA unabated, 250 Iranian activist outside Iran called Tuesday for breaking off diplomat contacts with Iran as a “terrorist-Islamic regime.”

The rial was trading just below 300,000 in Tehran’s unofficial exchange market for the first time since mid-May. The rial had fallen to as low as 330,000 a few weeks ago as hopes for a nuclear agreement with the United States were fading.

Iran responded to a European Union proposal to resolve the nuclear issue on Monday, in what seemed to offer the best chance since March to reach an agreement.

Iran’s currency began falling in early 2018 when signs emerged that former President Donald Trump was planning to withdraw from the 2015 nuclear agreement and possibly impose sanctions on Iran.

Once the US announced its withdrawal and imposed crippling oil export and banking sanctions, the currency gradually fell ninefold by 2021.

The rial has fallen 4,500-fold since the 1979 revolution that toppled the monarch. The currency was trading at 70 against the dollar in 1978 compared with 3,300 in 2017 and around 300,000 now.

Economists in Tehran have said in recent days that even if a nuclear deal is reached, the rial will not recoup most of its losses and will probably trade at around 240,000 to the dollar, because of serious structural economic issues.

Mohammad Marandi, who has been advisor-cum-spokesman for Iranian negotiators, spoke to both al-Jazeera and CNN television channels. Fars News, affiliated to Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, topped its site with Marandi’s words to Jazeera that “economic guarantees means protecting foreign companies and supporting them against American sanctions.”

Iran International had reported earlier Tuesday that Tehran, in a written response late Monday to European Union proposals made August 8, had said its search for economic guarantees had not been satisfied. The August 8 text, circulated by EU mediator Enrique Mora to bridge differences between the United States and Iran, had reportedly proposed a one-year respite from US sanctions for third parties trading with Iran should Washington again leave the Iran 2015 nuclear agreement, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), as it did in 2018 under President Donald Trump.

EU spokesperson Nabila Massrali confirmed Tuesday that the EU had passed on the Iranian response to the August 8 text. “We are studying, and consulting with the other JCPOA participants and the US on the way ahead,” she said.

Bloomberg Tuesday cited “an official familiar with the diplomatic efforts” that the EU saw the Iranian response as “constructive.”

‘That’s what we want’

In a briefing for journalists Tuesday, US State Department Spokesman Ned Price defended the Biden administration’s efforts to restore the JCPOA as an agreement restricting Iran’s nuclear program under international monitoring. “We don’t have that now – that’s what we want,” Price said. “We would prefer to have those permanent, verifiable limits…the deal that has been on the table since March is better than the status quo.”

Price refused to be drawn over Iran’s response to the EU text. “When we have more to say we’ll share that,” he said. “These are not simple issues that can be entertained, or tabled without the consultations we’ve had with the EU…where the parties have had an opportunity to ask questions of the coordinator, to seek additional information…these are complex issues.”

The semi-official Iranian news agency ISNA reported Tuesday that Iran expected a US response within two days, while the English-language Tehran Times called the Iranian input of Monday “a complete package” that had been agreed by an extraordinary meeting of the Supreme National Security Council chaired by President Ebrahim Raisi Monday afternoon.

The Tehran Times also reported that Iran had not included its previous demand that the International Atomic Energy Agency close enquiries into unexplained uranium traces found in sites linked to nuclear work before 2003.

Three differences – including nuclear guarantees

In remarks to journalists Monday, Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said messages were being exchanged with the US – presumably via the EU – on three issues. The foreign minister said Washington had expressed “verbal flexibility” on two, something Iran needed confirmed in writing, and that flexibility was still needed on “the third issue and guarantees.”

In a tweet Monday, Marandi also referred to three issues. In a separate tweet, he suggested Iran needed a route to rapidly restoring its nuclear program should the US again leave the JCPOA, so confirming that ‘guarantees’ sought by Tehran were not solely over sanctions.

One of the issues dogging 18-month talks has been agreeing exactly how the Iranian nuclear program, expanded since 2019, should be returned to JCPOA limits. Tehran has reportedly argued that it should store rather than scrap advanced centrifuges, which enrich uranium more efficiently and quickly. Barred under the agreement and have been gradually introduced by Iran since 2011.

After Iran responded Monday evening to the European Union – mediating indirect United States-Iran discussions – to proposals circulated August 8 by EU official Enrique Mora, US State Department spokesman Ned Price said he was “not going to get into the specifics of any language that may or may not result from this.”

Information gleaned by Iran International suggests Iran has eased its demands, especially in accepting the ‘language’ in the EU text over the status of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) enquiries into unexplained uranium traces found at sites not declared as nuclear-related. Tehran has publicly demanded the IAEA drop the probe.

Remaining issues, Iran International has reported, concern ‘guarantees’ Iran seeks over its access to world markets under terms specified by the 2015 deal, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action). According to Iran International, Iran has not accepted as sufficient a clause in the EU text offering Tehran and entities dealing with Iran, once the JCPOA was restored, a one-year respite from US sanctions should the JCPOA again fall away, presumably by Washington leaving the deal as it did in 2018 under President Donald Trump.

The long-running talks – Iran and six world powers in Vienna April 2021-March 2022; Iran-US bilaterally in Doha in June, and Vienna August 5-8 – have survived apparent setbacks including the change of president in Iran and the Ukraine crisis.

Core challenges

But the core challenges have remained agreeing which US sanctions are incompatible with the JCPOA and how exactly the Iran nuclear program, refined and expanded since 2019, should be returned to JCPOA limits. On the latter, there have been reports Iran has tried to gain acceptance for some of its nuclear developments, for example by keeping in storage rather than decommissioning advanced centrifuges barred under the 2015 deal.

Both the US and Iran have outwardly placed the onus on the other. “In return for Iran placing verifiable and permanent limits on its nuclear program, we would lift sanctions on that nuclear program,” Price said Monday. In Tehran Monday, Hossein Amir-Abdollahian, Iran’s foreign minister, said Iran wanted “a good, sustainable and strong agreement,” and awaited US “flexibility.”

Throughout the 16-month talks, there have been many reports of single issues supposedly blocking agreement. These have included the US listing of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards (IRGC) as a ‘foreign terrorist organization,’ which Washington argues is unrelated to the JCPOA while Iran argues the listing was specifically linked by the Trump administration to ‘maximum pressure.’

Likewise, while the US – along with the three European JCPOA signatories, France, Germany and the United Kingdom – have argued the IAEA probe into uranium traces is a matter of Iran’s basic ‘safeguards’ commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, Iranian officials have argued the agency’s enquiries were revived only after ‘politically-motivated’ allegations in 2018 by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

‘Nothing is agreed…’

But whatever possible concessions either the US or Iran have floated, “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed,” as US special envoy Rob Malley has put it, most recently in a PBS interview August 12.The fate of the JCPOA now hangs on whether negotiators can find a written text acceptable to all concerned.

Amir-Abdollahian said Monday that while “the coming days” were “very important,” it was possible that “we will need more efforts and talks ... to resolve the remaining issues.”

Ellie Geranmayeh, deputy director of the Middle East and North Africa program at the European Council for Foreign Relations, said Monday that if Iran wanted further talks on the Mora text, the US and Europeans would face a crucial choice in judging“how many amendments Iran seeks and how substantive they are…”