The Best Chance for Nuclear Deal

IRD: After the Istanbul negotiations, it seems that two opposite viewpoints on dealing with Iran have been put forward among the 5+1 countries: One approach believes in imposing more severe sanctions while the other sees talks as the only way to resolve Iran nuclear problem. In the last meeting of Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov with the British authorities, the problem seemed more serious. Considering these discrepancies, what do you think about the 5+1 countries’ approach to Iran?

AB: In her last statements Mrs. Ashton indicated that negotiating channels are blocked among 5+1 countries unless Iran changes its preconditions. This viewpoint was announced as the official view of the 5+1 group. But the view of Russia and then China is exceptional and temporary. Namely, if those countries want to have give and take with Europe, for example now laying a gas pipeline from Russia to Europe, they do it through Iran. Iran does not play any role in this game, but the others gamble over it.

The countries supporting economic sanctions like England, France and the US do not have any economic relations with Iran. Their position is the same as the past, but due to their wide-ranging economic relations with Iran, the other two members, namely Russia and China, reject sanctions; especially the if the latter’s aim is an economic one, but Russia follows other ones too, benefiting from the conflict between Iran and Europe to take advantage of both sides. Russia plays its role to secure its national interests, completely.

But the governing thought over the 5+1 group is that stated by Ashton, however, it is not that firm.IRD: After the Istanbul negotiations, unlike the Western viewpoint, Iranian authorities considered the outcome more positively and stated their readiness for more talks. How can that positive position of Iran affect the nuclear matter? 

AB: Two events had great effects on the matter: What occurred in Egypt and other Arab countries was beneficial to Iran, because it reduced international pressure on Iran and concentrated it on Egypt. In addition though, the latest internal incidents put Iran in a weak position.

But Iranian authorities follow two goals based on those issues: to continue the trend, and to prevent the negative propagation about breaking off the negotiations. Therefore, one side of such a position is nationalistic.

Of course, in all his speeches and talks, Mr. Ahmadinejad stresses Iran’s interest in continuation of negotiations, but when Iran attends meetings, the process is so slow and no advance is made.

IRD: Western media reported the 5+1 group’s new offer to exchange nuclear fuel in the Istanbul meeting. Iranian authorities mentioned it too. In your eyes, how is it possible for Iran to consider it?

AB: The new offer is an updated version of the last fuel exchange based on which a great amount of Iranian lower enriched uranium, and also 20-percent uranium produced in Iran, would be transferred to Russia and Tehran’s nuclear research reactor would be supported in return. In addition, the enrichment cycle could be continued in Iran in low levels, and the produced lower enriched uranium would be transferred from Iran to Russia to be converted to the Bushehr plant’s needed fuel.

The first draft of the offer was devised to have the enriching cycle in a Tehran-Moscow-Paris triangle. Now that Russia has the ball in its court, Europe does not have that much trust in it because of their many political contrasts. This attitude is stronger in the case of the US, and they are unwilling to lose the game to Russia.

Moscow’s strategy is that it focuses on the West but plays with Iran. Due to Russia’s numerous conflicts with the West, though, the West are unwilling to lose Iran totally to Russia.

That is the offer proposed in Istanbul. If it is as what it seems and there is no conflict between Russia and the West, it could be the best chance for Iran to make the deal; however, Russia is not that trustworthy, but easier to deal with.

IRD: In your words, you mentioned the Middle East changes and their effect on the Iran nuclear issue. About those effects, there are two views among analysts: 1) Middle Eastern changes put Iran out of focus in long run, and 2) after the changes, the West will try to resolve the Iranian problem sooner. Which is more probable to occur?

AB: Political issues are temporary. In long-run issues, we search for long-run strategies and events happen in the long run. In the present circumstances, politics necessitates taking action. Then, what happens in the ME has marginalized Iran’s issue. Due to occurrence inside the country, maybe it is even good for Iran.

But it is temporary. To the West, the Iran nuclear problem is more important than anything else, even more than what happened to Hosni Mubarak. Now it is possible to have less focus on the Iran nuclear matter, but is will be never forgotten.

IRD: Considering the events in the ME, the West has tried to increase Iranophobia in the region. Is it possible that a deal is offered to control Iran in the short term?

AB: The latest internal events were a setback for the government. Quality and quantity do not matter. But it was bad for Iran. We stated that the Arab revolts are all internal and Iran reacted so strongly, leaving no space for the occurrence of similar events in Iran.

Those events made Iran’s position weak, as it considered them as the effect of the Islamic revolution. It was a key in the West’s hand to act against us.

The ME is rapidly evolving, but the nuclear problem remains untouched.

In his visit last week, Abdullah Gül stated he hoped to have the next negotiations between Iran and 5+1 countries in Istanbul.

The Turks could not even dream of having trade exchanges of more than 30 billion dollars with any country. Therefore, they take advantage of their present circumstance. Erdogan appeared somehow an Islamist in the Davos forum: an position that much benefited Turkey. He claimed that Turkey has the capacity to control the region if it is not accepted into the EU..…the Turks were acting well in this matter.

Iran is now under economic restrictions, and has great interest in expanding ties with Turkey. Especially since the last meeting which was held in Turkey. The West thought that they could use Turkey’s influence over Iran to change our behavior. But it was all in vain, and I do not think that the next round of talks will be held in Turkey.