Since the new round of nuclear negotiations began, the Iranian regime has tried desperately to promote that it has the upper hand in the negotiations and that by insisting on its red lines, it has succeeded in bringing the US government to its knees and gaining some significant concessions. It has gone even further in making the preposterous claim of managing to create a schism among the World powers.
The mullahs are completely caught up in their self-made illusion, talking about deserving compensation because of the sanctions against them, while at the same time demanding that those sanctions be lifted. They are creating a foggy atmosphere, touting claims that both sides of the deal have reached a 95 percent agreement, and, therefore, they have dismissed any disagreements as insignificant or marginal.
However, the concerns put forward by the regime’s own media and experts are highlighting the reality of the situation. In an article entitled, “Delay in the revival of the JCPOA is dangerous,” the state-run Etemad daily wrote, “Decision-makers need to make new assessments and calculations of new regional arrangements and orientations. Assessment outside of the cumbersome considerations in Iranian official circles, however, shows that the delay and hesitation in the rapid signing of the JCPOA is a loss of a historic opportunity, and the loss of this opportunity will undoubtedly lead to historical regret.”
In an article entitled, “Vienna’s opportunity is being lost,” the state-run Mardom Salari daily quoted former regime official Kourosh Ahmadi, who warned the regime that they should not count on China’s help to circumvent the sanctions to sell oil, emphasizing that, “the revival of JCPOA could also end some of the political tension between the government and the outside world.”
A statement addressed to the Iranian regime’s president Ebrahim Raisi, by 250 members of the regime’s parliament has shown a new aspect of the dispute and disappointments of the regime regarding its future. Analyzing this statement, shows the obstacles officials face in reaching the desired agreement.
Paragraph one of the statement states, “In the new negotiations, the United States needs to guarantee a law that it will not withdraw from the JCPOA, and the issue will be adopted in a completely legal manner in its decision-making bodies such as Congress.”
It can be seen that the current US government has not guaranteed that it, or any future government, will not leave the JCPOA, and any such agreement will not be approved by Congress.
Regarding this matter, Fowad Izadi, from the regime’s principlist faction, made a remarkable point, saying, “A majority in the House of Representatives opposes what Mr. Robert Malley is doing in Vienna; occasionally, they make a statement or write a letter. The majority Republicans and Democrats, and in the US Senate, for example, there are now 49 to 50 Republican votes (against the negotiations).”
He added, “Four to five Democratic senators have officially stated that they do not agree with the Vienna process, and if five or six people join the group, then the US Senate will have the ability to break any agreement you have reached in Vienna. This means that it will repeat what happened last time.”
The second paragraph of the statement read, “One of the main conditions of negotiations is the absence of threats after the agreement. But the existence of a trigger mechanism actually means maintaining the threat and the failure of negotiations. Therefore, it is necessary to obtain the necessary guarantees in such a way that if the United States enters the JCPOA, the trigger mechanism will not be applied under various pretexts.”
From this paragraph, it can be understood that the application of the trigger mechanism in case of a possible agreement is one of the biggest concerns for the regime. If the Bidenadministration decides to return to the 2015 JCPOA, this will allow them the use the trigger mechanism.
The third paragraph expresses concern over the imposition of new US sanctions during the negotiations, stating, “Unfortunately, during the negotiations, the United States imposes new sanctions on government individuals, institutions, and agencies, which points to a destructive intention in the negotiations. So it is necessary to specifically prohibit the enactment and imposition of new sanctions and state that the lifted sanctions will not be re-imposed.”
This clause shows that even if the nuclear sanctions are lifted, others will be implemented that will address the missile program, terrorism, and human rights issues. This would mean that in practice, their temporary suspension will not benefit the regime.
