Iran Backtracks, Leaving Nuclear Talks in Doubt
Nuclear Talks Just Hit a Wall — Again
Iran is throwing some cold water on last week’s rising hopes that a plausible nuclear deal might be within reach.
Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said U.S. demands that Tehran refrain from enriching uranium are "excessive and outrageous", state media reported, voicing doubts whether nuclear talks will lead to an agreement.
"I don't think nuclear talks with the U.S. will bring results. I don't know what will happen," Khamenei said, adding that Washington should refrain from making outrageous demands in the negotiations.
This is a sharp course correction from comments made by the Iranian side of the negotiations last week.
Ali Shamkhani, a top political, military and nuclear advisor to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is one of the most senior Iranian officials to speak publicly about the ongoing discussions.
He said Iran would commit to never making nuclear weapons, getting rid of its stockpiles of highly-enriched Uranium which can be weaponized, agree to only enrich Uranium to the lower levels needed for civilian use, and allow international inspectors to supervise the process, in exchange for the immediate lifting of all economic sanctions on Iran.
Shamkhani’s comments had opened the possibility that a workable deal with Iran was on the table.
In principle, this deal addresses the major concerns which have been articulated by Donald Trump and his negotiators.
It means Iran does not develop nuclear weapons.
It means Iran disposes of its highly enriched uranium stockpiles.
It means Iran only enriches to ~3%, the level used in civilian reactors.
It means Iran opens its nuclear sites up to inspection.
The challenge, of course, is that Iran cannot be trusted—and no nation should ever be counted as trustworthy where nuclear weapons are concerned. As Ronald Reagan pithily observed during the Cold War: “Trust, but verify.”
That possibility may have been taken off the table once again.
Separately, Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Ismail Bekaei, in an interview with Arab media outlet Al-Mayadeen, accused the US of taking “contradictory positions”.
Bekaei also questioned the US requirement that Iran commit to “zero enrichment” and dismantle its enriching facilities.
Iranian leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has also rejected the US insistence Iran forego enrichment, referring to that “red line” as “nonsense”.
Enrichment has always been foundational to the negotiations. Without enrichment, Iran does not have a weapons program.
There has been hope for a fifth round of talks in Rome this weekend, but these latest remarks have deflated much of that hope.
Can the Trump Administration bridge the seemingly unbridgeable gap between the Iranian and US position with respect to nuclear enrichment, and Iran’s nuclear ambitions overall?
That remains very much the question of the moment, although in this latest moment, the outlook is grim.
What are your thoughts on the possibility of a workable deal with Iran over its nuclear weapons program?
Leave a comment below, or sound off in chat and share your thoughts on a potential nuclear weapons agreement with Iran
I don’t know enough to say much. Some say bombing the nuclear facilities is unlikely to succeed. I don’t believe Iran will give up their nuclear ambitions. So diplomatic efforts are likely to fail to achieve the goal of disarmament.
It seems we will have to use military force to prevent them from achieving nuclear weapons. But what specifically to do??
I’m glad you’re writing on this subject, as so much is at stake. Everything seems to be at an unresolvable stalemate. A cynical person (gosh, not ME) might conclude that Trump will be forced to implement some kind of “regime change” strategy, as the U.S. has done in the past. What do you think, Peter - do you see some kind of underhanded tactic that will be too tempting for Trump to resist?