Iran signaled the international community that it is in no hurry to continue nuclear negotiations, postponing the seventh round of negotiations that were scheduled to be held. Instead, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif announced, in a statement to the Islamic Consultative Assembly (Parliament) on July 12, that the upcoming round would be deferred to the government of incoming President Ibrahim Raisi, who will take office on August 5.
This delay could be linked to recent developments in the Arab region, as attacks on American forces in Syria and Iraq by militias loyal to Iran have escalated. This may in turn push the administration of US president Joe Biden to respond with stronger strikes, to send a message to Iran that the continuation of negotiations on the nuclear agreement does not mean it will overlook the role it plays on the ground within the borders of neighboring countries in the Arab region. It appears that this is the same message behind Washington’s military strikes on the Syrian-Iraqi border on June 28, targeting militia sites such as Kata’ib Hezbollah and Kata’ib Sayyid al-Shuhada.
Possible Explanations for postponment:
The new position adopted by Iran towards the Vienna negotiations can be interpreted in three ways, some of which are directly correlated to the recent escalation in Iraq and Syria.
- Strengthening Iran’s negotiating position: It appears that the decision to postpone talks was taken by incoming president Ibrahim Raisi, with the aim of strengthening Iran’s negotiating position and applying pressure to obtain the largest possible gains from international powers. The efforts are mainly focused on reducing or removing the sanctions imposed by the United States on Iran. In his report, Zarif was keen to confirm that the negotiations had reached the stage of drafting a possible framework agreement, which would include lifting a large part of the sanctions, including on entities affiliated with the Supreme Leader and the Revolutionary Guards.
It is noteworthy that the postponement coincided with Iran’s announcement of the transfer of 20% enriched uranium oxide to the Research and Development Laboratory at the Fuel Manufacturing Center in Isfahan, where it will be converted into 20% enriched uranium before it is used for the fuel industry. This provoked negative reactions from international powers, who are raising doubts about the nature of the Iranian nuclear program, especially since Iran does not have a pressing need to produce uranium for research purposes.
Some analysts have linked the postponement to the escalation against American forces in Iraq and Syria. Although Iran announced on July 3rd that it did not support the attacks on American forces, the fact remains that this escalation may benefit the Iranians at the negotiating table, especially in regard to lifting the bulk of the sanctions and limiting negotiations to the nuclear file only.
- Forming a new team: Incoming Ibrahim Raisi is forming his new government, made up of figures belonging to the fundamentalist conservative movement. It remains unclear whether he will form a new negotiating team. This will depend on the President’s vision regarding the path of negotiations, and on the gains that Iran could obtain in the event of reaching a new deal. The short time available before the seventh round may not allow Raisi to make significant changes in the negotiating delegation, especially given he is fully aware of the negotiation track. Consequently, Iran may have decided to hold up the next round of negotiations until the consultations conducted by the President to form the new government arrive at a decision concerning this matter.
- Taking Credit for a New Deal: The postponement of the new round of talks cannot be separated from the continued political struggle inside Iran between the conservative and moderate parties, over who will have the most influence and the biggest role in reaching the new deal. The decision to postpone the seventh round may be linked to a wish to prevent concluding a deal during outgoing president Hassan Rouhani tenure, depriving him of the political influence and status that would confer on him among the moderate camp after his exit from office. This would not sit well with many political forces in Iran, who seek to marginalize the role of Rouhani, Zarif, and the moderate movement in general during the coming period.
It is noteworthy that Zarif was subjected to severe criticism regarding the report he submitted to the Shura Council, from the ultra-conservative media. Some of the points he made were considered to be inconsistent with reality, and that in return for lifting sanctions, there are increased demands and pressures on Iran, especially regarding the ballistic missile program and Iran’s regional role. This was in reference to attempts by the United States to reach an agreement with Iran by conducting supplementary negotiations on these two issues, and not limiting the current negotiations to the nuclear program only.
Potential Risks of Postponment:
There are risks to Iran postponing the negotiations. The move conveys to the international community a message that Iran is in no hurry to reach an agreement, while also sparking interpretations that Iran is attempting to buy time, which may lead to the collapse of negotiations. The differences between Iran and the international community are not negligible and will not be settled easily.
The United States was quick to respond to the postponement of the negotiations by stating that there will be consequences to this delay. US special envoy to Iran Robert Malley stated on June 25 that “the US will withdraw from negotiations if the agreement with Iran does not suit the interests of the United States,” adding that “the window for negotiating with Tehran will not remain open forever.”
This statement can be interpreted in two ways. The first is that Iran, in parallel with extending the talks, seeks to continue its escalatory measures in its nuclear program, as evidenced by its step of transferring uranium oxide to the research laboratory in Isfahan despite the knowledge that this move would provoke the international community, which believes that this would serve Iran’s nuclear military initiative well.
The second is that the Biden administration is facing strong domestic pressures from groups which reject negotiations with Iran and oppose the gains that Iran could obtain from a new deal. These pressures on the Biden administration are gradually increasing as negotiations continue with no resolution in sight. In conclusion, it is likely that Iran seeks to reach a deal but wants to maximize its gains as much as possible with the least possible concessions. This strategy by the Iranian may lead to problems for the new president, as the international community is running out of patience and is keen to demonstrate that the current negotiations taking place in Vienna cannot go on indefinitely.