Geneva: Fears and Hopes
Geneva: Fears and Hopes
Finally, after the meeting of Majid Takht-Ravanchi and Kazem Gharibabadi with Enrique Mora on Friday afternoon in Geneva, talks between Iran and the three European members of the JCPOA – Germany, France, and the UK – were held at the level of Deputy Foreign Ministers. In this regard, Gharibabadi, the Deputy Foreign Minister of Iran, announced the meeting with representatives of Germany, France, and the UK and stated that, according to the agreement, diplomatic talks are set to continue in the near future.
The Deputy of the Foreign Policy apparatus also clarified that another round of candid talks with the political directors of France, Germany, and Britain was held. In these talks, recent bilateral, regional, and international developments, especially issues related to nuclear matters and the lifting of sanctions, were reviewed and evaluated. According to Gharibabadi, we are strongly committed to pursuing the interests of our people, and our preference is the path of dialogue and interaction. It was agreed that diplomatic talks will continue in the near future.
Simultaneously with Gharibabadi’s remarks about the content of the meeting with representatives from Berlin, Paris, and London, The Guardian newspaper also reported that the purpose of Iran’s negotiations with the European troika in Geneva was to examine whether it is possible to work on Iran’s proposal. Another issue addressed was the effort to limit military cooperation between Iran and Russia. According to Entekhab, the media added that in exchange, the European Union might try to lift some economic sanctions, but the timeline is short before Trump comes to power. However, Iran emphasized that it has not provided any ballistic missiles to Russia, but these statements have not been accepted by the United States.
After the Geneva talks, which were held behind closed doors, representatives of each party released messages on social media stating that the consultations focused on Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions, and other regional issues. Lawrence Norman also wrote in a message on his personal page on the social network X about the recent talks between Iran and European countries in Geneva, stating that Iran told the Europeans that no unilateral conciliatory action will be taken by us before Trump’s official inauguration. They have not made this public but have implicitly indicated that limiting the accumulation of uranium reserves with 60% purity will no longer be done as a result of consultations with Rafael Grossi, Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
The journalist from The Wall Street Journal continued in his message, claiming that data from various sources in cyberspace about the tone of these consultations are somewhat different. Some have emphasized Iran’s willingness to continue talks considering Donald Trump’s approach to Iran after his inauguration on January 20. In this context, it is interesting that the negotiations of the European troika – Germany, France, and the UK – continued after the resolutions of the IAEA Board of Governors.
Negotiation in Geneva, Crisis in Syria
On the other hand, some domestic media have approached the start of Tehran’s representatives’ meetings with Europeans from a different perspective, linking the Geneva talks to recent developments in Syria.
As Kayhan wrote in its Saturday article, the design of the Aleppo war is one of those things that the West has brought to help the Zionists. That is, when our friends in Iran were preparing for negotiations with the West to approach them with friendship and reconciliation, they were busy designing Plan B, which is the revival of Takfiri terrorists in Syria. Negotiation is the exact opposite of war and tension. When the opponent is at war and during negotiations, the friends’ negotiations show the peak of the enemy’s fox-like nature.
In such an atmosphere, talking about negotiation will achieve nothing but breaking unity. Why? Because in the negotiation atmosphere, according to some of these friends, neither should ‘Death to Israel’ be said, nor should we help our allies, nor even conduct missile tests, or even write on a missile that Israel is a cancerous tumor.
In the midst of the talks between Iranian and European representatives in Geneva, besides the developments in Syria, some other events could also be a subject of discussion and influence, as the issue of the impact of installing new centrifuges in the country’s nuclear facilities on the future of Geneva negotiations will be one of those events.
In this regard, the U.S. State Department, in response to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s claim of installing thousands of new centrifuges in Iran, described it as a continuation of the path of escalating tension in contrast to cooperation with the Agency. According to ISNA, international media reported on Friday that the UN nuclear watchdog announced that Iran will begin enriching uranium with thousands of advanced centrifuges at its two main nuclear facilities in Fordow and Natanz, which will increase tensions over Tehran’s nuclear program.
According to a report that Agence France-Presse claims to have seen, the International Atomic Energy Agency has confirmed that Iran has installed about six thousand new centrifuges for enriching uranium.
According to this report, Iran had informed the Agency that it intends to gas about six thousand centrifuges at its sites in Fordow and Natanz for uranium enrichment up to five percent, which is above the 3.67 percent limit agreed upon by Tehran in 2015.
Following the publication of this report, the U.S. State Department, in a statement provided to the Associated Press, claimed that it is deeply concerned about Iran’s decision to choose the path of continuing escalation in contrast to cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency. The statement also claimed that continuing the production and accumulation of enriched uranium up to 60 percent by Iran has no credible civilian justification.
On the other hand, Abbas Araghchi, the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran, also reported in a meeting with José Manuel Albares Bueno, the Foreign Minister of Spain, that in response to the European countries’ action of passing a resolution against Iran in the IAEA Board of Governors, several thousand advanced Iranian centrifuges will be activated. He also pointed out in a separate meeting, referring to the Friday meeting of Iranian officials and the European troika in Geneva, which was centered on Iran’s nuclear program and sanctions, that the meeting of Iranian and European negotiators is essentially a brainstorming session to see if there is indeed a way out of the current situation.
Considering what has been said, Mohammad Javad Jamali Nobandegani, in a conversation with Shargh, analyzes the meetings held in Geneva from two general perspectives. Firstly, he does not necessarily evaluate the news about the continuation of negotiations and talks with European parties in Geneva or anywhere else as initial agreements. From the perspective of this former parliament member, one should not have an optimistic view and make a hundred percent judgment about reaching a conclusion in negotiations with European parties from now.
Because, according to the senior analyst of international affairs, the Geneva talks are currently in the stage of initial evaluations of the parties from each other and have not yet entered the stage of negotiations. With this understanding, the senior foreign policy commentator reminds that one should not define a positive or negative path and trajectory for negotiations with some optimistic analyses and hasty and premature judgments. However, Nobandegani in his further conversation does not rule out that negotiations of this kind, which have been conducted in Geneva, like previous rounds, may turn into time-consuming, complex, and even exhausting negotiations that in the short term do not achieve tangible outcomes.
A more important point that the member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Tenth Parliament addresses is related to the intensification of European diplomatic activities parallel to Donald Trump’s return to the White House. By raising this issue, Nobandegani acknowledges that the result of the Geneva negotiations and talks between Iranian parties and Europe, whatever it may be, will not be operational without the final opinion of the Americans. For this reason, the former parliament member reminds this key point that the final and main negotiations will be conducted after the coming to power of Donald Trump’s administration and with the direct opinion of Washington with Tehran, because Europeans do not have the necessary political and diplomatic independence to negotiate and agree with Tehran. As the senior international affairs analyst confirms his statement by pointing to the unsuccessful efforts of Europeans during the JCPOA and after Donald Trump’s withdrawal from the nuclear agreement.
Another point that is of importance from Nobandegani’s perspective relates to regional developments from Palestine and Lebanon to recent unrest in Syria, and following that, he reminds that this series of developments in the Middle East will practically become pressure levers for Western parties to negotiate with Iran, with the aim of addressing not only the nuclear issue but also Iran’s regional influence and defensive capabilities, and conducting negotiations with Tehran in this regard. However, the more crucial topic that the former parliament member believes can be decisive is related to Iran’s recent action of installing new centrifuges following the issuance of a resolution in the IAEA Board of Governors, as the member of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission of the Tenth Parliament emphasizes and clarifies that this action will act as a balancing measure that can provide a stronger hand for the Iranian negotiating team both against Europe and against the United States.
Moreover, Nobandegani, in a not-so-optimistic analysis, warns of a key point that if the talks with Western parties do not result in a conclusion and the trigger mechanism is likely to be activated, certainly changing the nuclear doctrine and Iran’s withdrawal from the NPT can change all equations.
For this reason, the former parliament member warns in advance that a path for negotiations should not be taken that ultimately forces Iran to change its nuclear doctrine and withdraw from the NPT.
Because, from Nobandegani’s perspective, neither of these two issues is a diplomatic bluff by Tehran, and certainly, if the trigger mechanism is activated, Tehran will operationalize these two actions. Considering all the warnings given, the senior international affairs analyst views the coming to power of Masoud Pezeshkian’s government and the positive and forward-looking rhetoric of the fourteenth government for de-escalation as a unique opportunity for Europe and the United States that should not be missed.
Moreover, the former parliament member does not positively evaluate some internal obstructions, oppositions, and protests in the path of Pezeshkian’s government negotiations by some political currents and a spectrum of the country’s media.
Because, according to Nobandegani, both Iran’s situation and the region’s situation, as well as international developments, have become highly fluid and at the same time sensitive. Therefore, there should be no pause in the path of dialogue, negotiation, and de-escalation.