Iran and Britain: History of strained relations

British-Iranian relations have been strained for decades, were back in the spotlight after Iranian authorities executed British-Iranian national Alireza Akbari for spying, charges he had denied.

Here is a timeline of main developments since the 1950s:

1953 - Britain and the United States help orchestrate the overthrow of popular Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh and restore Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi to power.

1979 - Islamic Revolution overthrows the US-backed Shah.

1980 - Britain closes its embassy in Tehran.

1988 - Britain restores full diplomatic relations with Iran.

1989 - Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini calls on Muslims to kill British author Salman Rushdie for blasphemy against Islam in his book "The Satanic Verses", prompting Britain to break diplomatic relations in March.

1990 - Partial diplomatic relations restored.

1994 - Britain accuses Iran of contacts with the outlawed Irish Republican Army, a charge Iran denies but relations worsen. Iran and Britain expel each others' diplomats over the IRA issue.

1998 - Iran formally dissociates itself from the call to kill Rushdie.

1999 - Iran says relations between Tehran and Britain have been upgraded to ambassadorial level.

2001 - British Foreign Minister Jack Straw visits Iran to strengthen an international "anti-terror" coalition after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the United States.

2004 - Iran arrests eight British military personnel for straying into its waters from Iraq. They are later freed.

2005 - Britain says there is evidence Iran or the Iran-backed Lebanese militia Hezbollah was the source of technology used in roadside bombs against British soldiers in Iraq, a charge Tehran Iran denied. The same year, Iran accuses Britain of being behind bombings that killed six people in Iran. London denies it.

2007 - Iranian forces seize eight Royal Navy sailors and seven marines from their patrol boat in the Shatt al-Arab waterway separating Iran and Iraq. They are freed in April.

2007 - Iran's Foreign Ministry summons the British ambassador to protest against the award of a British knighthood to Salman Rushdie.

2009 - Britain freezes Iranian assets under Western sanctions imposed over Iran's disputed nuclear program. The same month, Britain protests to Iran after Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei calls Britain the most treacherous of Iran's enemies. London and Tehran each expel two of the other's diplomats.

2009 - Iran releases on bail the last of nine Iranians who worked at the British embassy and who had been detained in June for alleged involvement in unrest following an Iranian election.

2011 - Britain imposes financial sanctions on Iran, ordering all UK financial institutions to stop doing business with Iranian counterparts and Iran's central bank. Iran's Guardian Council approves a parliamentary bill reducing ties with Britain.

2011 - Britain shuts Iran's embassy in London and expels its staff, saying the storming of the British mission in Tehran that month could not have taken place without consent from Iran's authorities.

2015 - Iran reaches a nuclear deal with the United States, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China. Under the agreement Iran accepted curbs on its nuclear program in return for a lifting of many foreign sanctions. Iran reopens its embassy in London hours after Britain restores diplomatic ties.

2016 - Iran detains British-Iranian aid worker Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, who was employed by the Thomson Reuters Foundation, a charity operating independently of Thomson Reuters and its news subsidiary Reuters. She was later convicted of seeking to overthrow the clerical rulers, a charge she denied.

2019 - Twitter suspended Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's account over a tweet that said Khomeini's fatwa against Rushdie was solid and irrevocable.

March 2022 - Zaghari-Ratcliffe and another British-Iranian dual national, Anoosheh Ashoori, return to Britain from Iran.

August 2022 - Salman Rushdie is stabbed on stage at a literary event in New York. Iran's Foreign Ministry says no one has the right to level accusations against Tehran. Several Iranian hardliner newspapers praise Rushdie's attacker.

October 2022 - Britain imposes sanctions on three Iranian military figures and a defence manufacturer for supplying Russia with drones used to attack targets in Ukraine.

November 2022 - The head of Britain's domestic spy agency says Iran's intelligence services have made at least 10 attempts to kidnap or kill British nationals or individuals in Britain.

December 2023 - Iran's Revolutionary Guards arrest seven people with links to Britain over anti-government protests.

January 2023 - Iran sentences to death and executes British-Iranian national Alireza Akbari, a former Iranian Defence Ministry official, on charges of spying for Britain. State media say he was involved in the 2020 assassination in Iran of a top nuclear scientist. Akbari denied the charges.

Courtesy: Reuters

Iran and United State to clash in Qatar

The United States and Iran, diplomatic rivals for more than 40 years, clash on the soccer pitch on Tuesday, their places at the World Cup on the line in a fitting finale for the most politically charged group at this year's tournament.

The national team coaches sidestepped the icy bilateral relations, saying they were focused on the tournament and its ability to bring people together.

Washington and Tehran severed diplomatic relations in 1980 after the Islamic revolution. Ties have been strained in recent years when then-President Donald Trump pulled the United States out of an Iran nuclear deal. The United States killed a top Iranian general in 2020 and Tehran responded with missile strikes at US forces based in Iraq.

“I envision the game being hotly contested for the fact that both teams want to advance to the next round, not because of politics or because of relations between our countries," said US coach Gregg Berhalter.

"The thing about soccer is you meet so many different people from all around the world, and you're united by a common love of the sport. We're soccer players and we're going to compete and they're going to compete and that's it."

Iran's dramatic 2-0 win over Wales and the US team's tense goalless stalemate against England on Friday set up a tantalizing final round of Group B matches.

England, sitting top with four points, face bottom side Wales, meaning the Iran-United States contest will decide which team goes through to the round of 16.

The eagerly awaited meeting is a rematch of the 1998 World Cup group stage contest, dubbed the mother of all games, which Iran won 2-1. In a symbolic moment before that match at Lyon's Stade Gerland, the Iranian players gave white roses, a symbol of peace in the country, to their American opponents.

Overshadowing Iran's World Cup build-up this year has been civil unrest at home over the September death in police custody of 22-year-old Mahsa Amini, arrested for flouting the country's strict Islamic dress code.

Team Melli declined to sing Iran's national anthem in their first game against England in an apparent show of solidarity with protesters. They sang quietly on Friday at the Ahmad bin Ali Stadium, where boos and jeers were heard from Iran supporters.

Amid growing public pressure on players to take a stand over a deadly crackdown on protests, Iran rallied late against Wales to rescue a World Cup campaign that seemed to have flatlined following their 6-2 thrashing by England.

Berhalter, whose exuberant side drew 1-1 with Wales in their group opener, described the match as his team's "first knockout game" of the World Cup and was wary of the threat posed by Iran after their second-half assault against Wales.

"Now we need to be sure that we are good enough to go to the second round," Iran coach Carlos Queiroz said after his team kept alive their hopes of a first ever trip to the knockout stage.

"The US is a brilliant team as well, as we saw them against Wales.

"Our preparation starts with a good rest, refresh the minds and put all the complementary and garbage things outside of our minds and focus on our goal, because what we want to do is to give this gift to Iranian fans."

 

 

 

Israeli Prime Minister backs two state solution

Israeli Prime Minister Yair Lapid called on Thursday for a two-state solution to decades of Israeli-Palestinian conflict and reasserted that Israel would do "whatever it takes" to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb.

His mention of a two-state solution, the first by an Israeli leader in years at the United Nations General Assembly, echoed US President Joe Biden's support in Israel in August for the long-dormant proposal.

"An agreement with the Palestinians, based on two states for two peoples, is the right thing for Israel's security, for Israel's economy and for the future of our children," Lapid said.

He added any agreement would be conditioned on a peaceful Palestinian state that would not threaten Israel.

Lapid spoke less than six weeks before a November 01, 2022 election that could return to power the right-wing former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, a longstanding opponent of the two-state solution.

Israel captured East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza - areas that Palestinians seek for an independent state - in a 1967 Middle East war. US-sponsored Israeli-Palestinian peace talks collapsed in 2014.

In his speech, Lapid again denounced Iran and voiced Israel's determination to prevent its longtime foe from gaining a nuclear weapon.

"The only way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon is to put a credible military threat on the table," he said. "We have capabilities and we are not afraid to use them."

Widely believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear weapons, Israel regards Iran as an existential threat. Tehran denies trying to develop a nuclear weapon.

Efforts to reach a two-state Israeli-Palestinian deal have long been stalled.

Palestinians and rights groups say Israel has entrenched its control of the occupied Palestinian territories through its military rule over millions of Palestinians and persistent settlement construction.

Wasel Abu Youssef, a senior member of the Palestine Liberation Organization, told Reuters that Lapid's words "mean nothing."

"Whoever wants a two-state solution must implement it on the ground," he said, by respecting previously reached agreements, stopping settlement expansion and recognizing East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state.

US Ambassador to Israel Tom Nides called Lapid's speech "courageous" for supporting the two-state solution.

Lapid praised efforts by Middle Eastern countries to normalize relations and cooperate with Israel. He urged Muslim countries, from Indonesia to Saudi Arabia, to make peace with it.

 

 

 

United States imposes new sanctions on Iran

The United States on Friday has imposed sanctions on Iran's Ministry of Intelligence and Security and its Minister, accusing them of being tied to a disruptive July cyberattack on Albania and engaging in other cyber activities against the United States and its allies.

The move came after Albania severed diplomatic relations with Iran on Wednesday for the same incident, ordering Iranian diplomats and embassy staff to leave within 24 hours. 

The US Treasury Department in a statement said the Ministry of Intelligence and Security directs several networks of cyber threat actors, including those involved in cyber espionage and ransomware attacks in support of the Iranian government.

The Ministry was already designated under US sanctions. Iran's mission to the United Nations in New York did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Microsoft, whose cybersecurity research team investigated the incident, said in a blog post on Thursday that the Iranian cyber operation involved a combination of digital espionage techniques, data wiping malware and online information operations. The goal of the hackers, according to researchers, appeared to be to embarrass Albanian government officials.

The July attacks temporarily disrupted government websites and other public services. Analysts say the operation was intended to punish Albania for supporting an Iranian dissident group based in the country, known as the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK). 

Can Iraqi mediation bring Saudi Arabia and Iran closer?

According to a report by Saudi Gazette, Iraqi Prime Minister Mustafa Al-Kadhimi paid a visit to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, during which he met Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman. The visit was followed by another visit to the Iranian capital Tehran, during which he met senior Iranian officials of that country.

What emerged from these two visits was an attempt of mediation to ease the atmosphere and reduce tension in the region, through dialogue between Saudi Arabia and Iran.

There has been no halt for the Iraqi attempts of mediation over the past few years, especially after the assumption of office by Al-Kadhimi as prime minister of the country. Al-Kadhimi is a respectable leader for Saudi Arabia, as the Kingdom sees him as a patriotic figure who works sincerely to resolve the huge crises that are afflicting Iraq.

The Iraqi viewpoint is that crises in inter-regional relations produce negative impact on Iraq internally. The more the region moves towards resolving crises and easing tension, the more this gives a comfortable ground for rulers in Mesopotamia.

It is true that the crises in Iraq are structural and it is very difficult to overcome most of these without understanding all the crises in their entirety. There is a possibility to mitigate the impact of these dilemmas, and perhaps the most important of them is the security dilemma.

It is ironic that Saudi Arabia, in its understanding and approach, is betting on Iran, which is striving to be a national state, and this is a major point of contention with Iran. The latter is betting on pre-state groups, and even supports them through illegal channels far from what is supposed to be from a national state, whether the militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, Hezbollah in Lebanon and others.

Restoring the national state will not be an easy matter after years of tampering with the social fabric in the countries of the region, which negatively affected the security and stability of the entire region.

It goes without saying that restoration of the state’s presence and roles through internal dialogue and negotiations and by stopping states from interfering in the internal affairs of other states, all of this would contribute to averting these states and the entire region from bloodshed.

Saudi Arabia spares no effort in extending the hand of dialogue to all who want to reach to this end, despite the pile up of discouraging experiences in terms of dialogue.

A point of concern is the arms race that Tehran wants to launch. It will not serve anyone, and it will cause serious consequences for Iran itself. Here we are talking about two aspects: The first is the nuclear program and the anxiety it causes to countries in the region and the lack of confidence in Iranian promises, especially with the increase in the enrichment rate and the secret aspects that Iran seeks to hide.

The second aspect is the program of drones and ballistic missiles that pose a serious threat to the entire region, and in this also there is a threat to the arms race that has already begun.

Serious dialogue to reach a security system can be a window not to resolve crises, as we all wish, but at least to manage them. As for the idea of dialogue for the sake of image, it will not work as the region had tried it during the past decades, a dialogue that results in smiles in front of cameras but fears remain.

What is worst is that Tehran is using this dialogue to continue its troubling policies, all of which will not be useful.

Saudi Arabia, under the leadership of King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, continues its efforts in the region to restore stability, avoid tension, and defuse crises whenever it is possible.

United States urged to restore Iran nuclear deal

More than 40 former government officials and leading nuclear non-proliferation experts have expressed strong support for an agreement that returns Iran and the United States to comply with the 2015 nuclear deal.

The accord between Iran and the major world powers, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was unanimously endorsed by the UN Security Council through Resolution 2231.

The major world powers are P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States—plus Germany) together with the European Union.

The joint statement points out that if President of United States, Joe Biden fails to bring negotiations with Iran to a prompt and successful conclusion it would perpetuate the failed strategy pursued by the Trump administration and allow Iran to further improve its capacity to produce weapons-grade nuclear material. The result, the nuclear nonproliferation experts write, “would increase the danger that Iran would become a threshold nuclear-weapon state”.

Signatories of the letter include a former special representative to the president of the United States on non-proliferation, former US State Department officials, the United States’ former Ambassador to Israel, Russia, and the United Nations, and leading nuclear non-proliferation experts based in the United States, Europe, and Asia.

“A prompt return to mutual compliance with the JCPOA is the best available way to deny Iran the ability to quickly produce bomb-grade nuclear material,” the experts’ letters notes.

“It would reinstate full IAEA international monitoring and verification of Iran’s nuclear facilities, thus ensuring early warning if Iran were to try to acquire nuclear weapons—and possibly become the second state in the Middle East (in addition to Israel) with such an arsenal.”

Despite Iran’s compliance with the accord, former US President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the JCPOA in May 2018, reimposed sanctions that had been waived as part of the agreement and embarked on a pressure campaign designed to deny Tehran any benefit of remaining in compliance with the nuclear deal.

Iran continued to meet its JCPOA obligations until May 2019, when Tehran began a series of calibrated violations of the agreement designed to pressure the remaining JCPOA parties to meet their commitments and push the United States to return to the agreement. These violations, while largely reversible, have increased the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program.

“As a result of Trump administration policies,” the experts’ statement says, “it is now estimated that the time it would take Iran to produce a significant quantity (25 kg) of bomb-grade uranium (enriched to 90 percent U-235) is down from more than a year under the JCPOA, to approximately one or two weeks today.”

“Restoring the limits on Iran’s nuclear program will significantly increase (by many months) the time it would take Iran to produce a significant quantity of bomb grade material, which provides the margin necessary for the international community to take effective action if Iran were to try to do so,” the experts say.

“Just as importantly,” the experts write, “the JCPOA mandates unprecedented International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring, verification, and transparency measures that make it very likely that any possible future effort by Iran to pursue nuclear weapons, even a clandestine program, would be detected promptly.”

Failure to bring Iran back under the limits established by the JCPOA would produce long-term adverse effects on the global non-proliferation regime, put US allies at greater risk, and create a new nuclear crisis, experts say.

Courtesy: International Press Syndicate

 

OPEC plus wants Iran to join supply deal

Reportedly, Iran has risen above Russia on the oil market radar due to reports from multiple sources that a new nuclear deal is very close to being agreed upon. There are also rumors that Russia is about to invade Ukraine, which has sent oil prices soaring earlier in the week, but tensions eased slightly by the weekend.

Iran is already gearing up for a return of its crude to international markets. The country last year announced production ramp-up plans. This week, media reported that officials from the state-owned National Iranian Oil Company had visited South Korea to discuss supply deals with local refiners.

If a deal is reached on Iran’s nuclear program, the country could add 500,000 bpd to global oil supply between April and May. According to Rystad Energy analyst Louise Dickson, Iran can ramp up production very quickly, in a matter of four to six months, and it also has substantial amounts of oil in storage to offer on international markets if sanctions are lifted

A potential agreement about the United States and Iran returning to the so-called nuclear deal looks close, according to an OPEC+ source.

“It is very likely OPEC will adjust Iran into the deal, as there is no other option,” the source told Reuters.

Over the past few days, there have been hints from diplomats that a deal on reviving the nuclear agreement is indeed close, which pushed oil prices lower.

Iran’s main negotiator, Ali Bagheri Kani, tweeted late on Wednesday. “After weeks of intensive talks, we are closer than ever to an agreement; nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, though. Our negotiating partners need to be realistic, avoid intransigence and heed lessons of past four years. Time for their serious decisions.”

In case a deal is reached, the United States has said that the window of reaching an agreement is closing fast—Iran could return some 1.3 million barrels per day (bpd) to the market within several months after the US lifts sanctions on its oil exports.

According to diplomats who spoke to Reuters, a draft of an agreement being discussed would put the main sanction-lifting stage, including oil exports, at a later stage, while releasing Western prisoners held in Iran and unfreezing Iranian funds would come first.

In the event of an agreement, OPEC+ would look to include Iran—currently exempted from all OPEC+ pact quotas—in the deal, Reuters’ source says.

Iran, for its part, will likely seek first to restore its oil production and exports, but it will also likely agree to a quota after talks with OPEC+, a source with knowledge of Iran’s thinking told Reuters.

It is looking increasingly likely that a new nuclear deal with Iran will be reached and sanctions on its oil industry will be lifted.

Iran would likely want to restore production to near pre-sanctions levels before joining any such agreement

 

Bennett and Iran animosity

Naftali Bennett, Prime Minister of Israel, has said that the theory of “killing Iran with 1000 knife wounds is similar to what happened to the former Soviet Union”. Doesn’t he sound delusional?

In an interview with the Israeli Ynet daily, Bennett said, “… but Iran itself, which is the root of evil, is safe. Here is a cold war going on, we are changing this equation, we are trying to weaken Iran in all dimensions economically, socially and security-wise. We act more and do not give up.”

The notion of comparing Iran to the Soviet Union, and the current status of the Islamic Republic with the 1985-1989 of the Soviet Union shows how far Bennett is from the ground reality.

What is going on in Tehran is that the country is by no means isolated. The Belt and Road Initiative put forward by China and Iran’s active participation in the initiative, 25-year Iran-China cooperation document, the soon-to-be-signed 20-year cooperation document with Russia, and so many more examples clarify Iran’s position as a regional and even trans-regional power. 

In some rather insulting remarks, the Israeli prime minister said, “I look at Iran as an ongoing campaign. Iran has been an octopus for decades, its arms encircling the falcons in Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, and the falcons fall into its trap and bleed. We have dramatically increased the range of attacks as well as the type of attacks and the quality of the targets. This creates a problem for Iran.”

The delusional Bennett seems to have forgotten how its Iron Dumb was penetrated in the 12-day war against Gaza. The fact that Bennett thinks he has created problems for Iran is a true reflection of a pathological liar who wants to mend his reputation after only seven months in office. 

In response to a question about “a thousand knife wounds” strategy that the Tel Aviv regime dreams of implementing, Bennett said, “A thousand blows is not like that.

Remember the cold war between the United States and the Soviet Union? Did the Americans attack the Russians? No, but they were able to crush them wisely.”

He continued, “We must act without interruption until they leave here. What are you doing here? What do you think you are doing In Syria? What do you think you are doing at our borders?”

Someone needs to ask Bennett the same questions. What is Israel doing in West Asia? Where is this regime’s status in the economic, political and sociological equations of the region? 

The regime with a dark history of trespassing, colonizing and occupying other people’s lands is in no place to talk about a rich civilization like Iran who has been present in the region for more than 2500 years. 

Regardless of the fact that Israel is not able to confront Iran at all, Bennett seemingly has taken some time off of repairing an Iron Dome full of holes. 

Struggling with a cyberspace that is full of holes, leaks of the military forces with their ID numbers on the internet, a war minister with a housekeeper who turned out to be a spy and so many other crises in only seven months, Bennett can’t keep quiet, and seems to be giving interviews which are full of lies. 

Russia offered Iran interim nuclear deal

Iran was offered an interim nuclear agreement by Russia with the knowledge of the United States. Citing numerous former and current US officials, NBC reported that Iran rejected Russia's interim proposal, which was reportedly given the go-ahead by the Biden administration.

One draft of Russia's proposed interim agreement would have seen the Islamic Republic forced to stop enriching uranium up to 60%. In addition, Iran would have had to dispose of its existing stockpile of enriched uranium.

In exchange, certain sanctions would have been lifted that meant Iran could have gained access to billions of dollars frozen in foreign bank accounts, including South Korea, where the US permitted to pay damages owed to an Iranian company in a move seen as a trust-building step.

However, Iran rejected Russia's proposal and the US distanced itself from Russia's attempts at an interim agreement, according to the report.

Earlier, the Islamic Republic denied a report it had reached a two-year interim agreement with world powers. An interim arrangement is not under serious discussion, NBC reported, citing a senior Biden administration official.

"Though we cannot speak for any discussions that may have taken place between Russia and Iran, at this stage we are certain that no such interim arrangement is being seriously discussed," the official reportedly said.

Russia's attempt at reaching an interim deal with Iran comes a day after Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke with his American counterpart Antony Blinken, when the latter warned that talks with Iran have reached "a decisive moment."

Blinken said that, while the window of opportunity to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) still exists, Iran's nuclear advancements would foil any return to the accord if a fresh pact was not reached in the coming weeks.

Other voices around the negotiation table seem more optimistic, with a European Union official saying on Friday that the Vienna talks are moving in the right direction and a final agreement may be within reach. Indirect talks between Iran and the United States on reviving the deal resumed almost two months ago

Iran to return to talks in November

On October 27, 2021, Iran’s lead negotiator announced the return to nuclear talks with the world’s six major powers by the end of November this year. 

Ali Bagheri, the new Deputy Foreign Minister, tweeted the announcement after meeting in Brussels with Enrique Mora, the EU coordinator for the talks.

In response, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that the Europeans and the US negotiators would determine next steps. “Our framing continues to be compliance for compliance,” she told reporters. 

A return to negotiations in Vienna, however, is no guarantee that the diplomatic process will resolve the deep differences between Tehran and Washington over both substance and sequencing.

On substance, Iran wants guarantees that the United States will never reimpose sanctions if it returns to compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal, while the Biden administration says it cannot guarantee what another president might do.

On sequencing, Iran wants the United States to lift sanctions before Tehran reverses breaches that began in 2019, after the Trump administration abandoned the deal and reimposed sanctions. 

The Biden administration has stipulated that both countries must simultaneously return to their commitments in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

From April to June 2021, Iran and the world’s six major powers held six rounds of talks on restoring the 2015 nuclear deal. Diplomacy stalled in June during Iran’s presidential campaign and the political transition as Ebrahim Raisi took office and appointed his cabinet in August. The two main issues in the talks are lifting US sanctions and reversing Iran’s nuclear program that can be addressed in the following three likely scenario.

Scenario 1

President Raisi's team agrees to a deal that is marginally better for Iran than the package that was on the table in June. Although they were close to their bottom lines, both sides probably still have some maneuvering space. If they are willing to compromise, this would be the least costly option. It would provide the Raisi administration with an early political win, which could be framed as their victory given that the hardliners now control all levers of power and dominate the country’s media. It would also constitute a much needed economic reprieve amid a confluence of crises that Iran is facing, ranging from economic stagnation and social unrest to the raging COVID-19 pandemic.

The Biden administration, which has had a major setback in Afghanistan, would benefit not just by defusing a simmering nuclear crisis, but also by potentially paving the ground for de-escalation in Iraq and in the Gulf. This would allow Washington to shift its focus to the larger challenge of great power competition with China and Russia. The parties could then try to achieve a better-for-better deal that is more satisfactory for both sides and thus more stable than the JCPOA.

Scenario 2

Raisi's team drives a hard bargain and makes maximalist demands that are unacceptable to the United States and European powers. This is the most likely outcome because the Iranian leadership seems to believe that time is on its side. Iran sees an advantage in the exponential growth of its nuclear program. It also views the US leverage from sanctions as past its peak and now at the point of diminishing returns. Iran also believes that the West has no appetite for military confrontation. This calculus is underpinned by an optimistic view on Iran’s ability to remain afloat as its economy has stabilized and oil exports to China hover around a million barrels per day. 

In this scenario, Iran would insist that the United States lift all the sanctions that were imposed and reimposed since 2017, provide the sanctions relief upfront and allow several months for Tehran to verify its effectiveness. Iran would also demand guarantees. It is not hard to predict what comes next.

In 2005, when Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to power, Iran pursued a similar confrontational approach, which led to 10 years of mutual escalation in what can be called the race of sanctions against centrifuges. It was a lose-lose game for both sides and brought them to the brink of military confrontation.

Renegotiating the package that has been coming together in six rounds of talks is not going to shift Washington’s bottom lines or core demands, but it risks bringing down the JCPOA. This is primarily because there are pressure points on the timeline. The United States and European powers are increasingly concerned that Iran’s advances are approaching the point of irreversibility, making the existing agreement, even if fully restored, insufficient.

At the same time, Iran is in a standoff with the IAEA over access for its inspectors and outstanding issues with regards to Iran’s past nuclear activities. If these issues are not resolved before the end of 2021, another referral to the UN Security Council is almost certain.

Scenario 3

Raisi's team seeks to negotiate a new deal to replace the JCPOA. A consensus seems to have emerged among the Iranian hardliners, who now control all levers of power that the JCPOA was flawed from the beginning and that its restoration is futile as it will only produce the same outcome ‑ depriving Iran of its nuclear leverage with an empty promise of economic incentives, followed by a return of sanctions. This approach has a lot of appeal to those in Tehran and Washington who deem the JCPOA inadequate and seek a more advantageous agreement, JCPOA-Plus. 

Kayhan, the daily whose editor in chief is appointed by the Supreme Leader, recently wrote, “The JCPOA must change is the one issue upon which Iran and the US converge.” But the path to a new deal is likely to pass through a risky escalation. 

Iran might up the nuclear ante further, prompting the United States to impose more coercive measures, both looking for more leverage ahead of a return to talks. Iran, as it has already indicated in the six rounds of talks in Vienna, would want more sanctions relief, including from US primary sanctions. They were the main obstacle to the Iranian banking sector’s return to the US$-dominated global financial system after the United States lifted sanctions in 2016. Iran also wants compensation for damages incurred during the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign. 

The path to a JCPOA-Plus does not need to be so treacherous. One option to avoid the escalatory cycle would be to quickly strike an arrangement that amounts to a JCPOA-Minus. Iran could agree to freeze proliferation-sensitive activities, including uranium enrichment above 3.67 percent, advanced centrifuge work, and uranium metal production. In return, the Western powers could accept an agreed-upon level of oil exports and/or partial access to its frozen assets.

An interim arrangement could cap the immediate nuclear proliferation crisis, deliver economic reprieve for Iran, and buy time for the parties to negotiate parameters of a more-for-more JCPOA-Plus that addresses their broader demands. One pertinent question here is whether such an interim agreement would trigger the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act (INARA) of 2015 – a US law requiring any new deal with Iran to be subject to a congressional review, but a JCPOA-Minus is not a new deal, it is a waystation toward the original agreement.