- 9 May 2008
-
- 4 Comments
-
-
-
- Diplomacy, Panel Discussion, US-Iran War
Can P5+1 Offer Break the Nuclear Stalemate?
9 May 2008 Posted By Trita Parsi
There is little doubt that Tehran will reject the secret P5+1 nuclear offer since it crosses Iran’s red line — suspension of enrichment. The proposal is scheduled Though reinvigorating diplomacy is much needed, the question is why the Security Council powers would make an offer that few believe will break the stalemate at this point – that is, at a time when tensions Iran and the US over Iraq is quickly escalating?
In the piece below, published by Inter Press Services today, I discuss why Tehran is so inflexible on the issue of suspension based on its previous negotiating experience with the EU and why Washington’s insistence on this precondition is leading to a situation in which “the perfect is becoming the enemy of the good.”
“Tehran sees two key problems with the suspension precondition. First, Iran has taken away from earlier negotiations with the EU that suspension becomes a trap unless the West at the outset commits to solutions that recognise Iran’s right to enrichment, i.e. that won’t cause the suspension to become permanent.
Iran entered talks with Europe in 2003 under the impression that the parties would identify “objective criteria” that would enable Tehran to exercise its rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty while providing the international community with guarantees that the Iranian nuclear programme would remain strictly civilian. During the course of the talks, however, Europe shifted its position. The only acceptable criteria would be for Iran not to engage in uranium enrichment in the first place, the EU began to argue.
Consequently, Tehran felt trapped since the objective had shifted from seeking a peaceful Iranian enrichment programme to seeking the elimination of Iran’s enrichment capabilities.”
The full piece can be found here: http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=42307
/trita
4 Responses to “Can P5+1 Offer Break the Nuclear Stalemate?”
btw – sign up for my personal email list on tritaparsi.com
Dear Dr. Parsi,
I like to thank NIAC staff for their tireless efforts to represent the views of the majority of moderate Iranian Americans in Washington political circles; and hopefully will avert a disasterous war with Iran.
Dear Jamchid – thank you so much! All of us at NIAC know that our success is due to people like yourself and the thousands of other iranian americans that support NIAC
Dr Parsi,
Your article presents a thoughtful and interesting perspective on the recent diplomatic events that led to this latest 5+1 package. It seems that you are suggesting that the hidden agenda behind the new package is to make either Iran accept it and loose face or refuse it and face war.
Even though the political and social events of the last few years in Europe; the EU rapprochement, after Bush second term, toward US position on Iran (and I believe not the other way around); and, recently, a strong rumor of Bank Melli being targeted for asset freeze in Europe, can re-inforce this perception and therefore your conclusions. There might be, if you allow me, another twist to this “package diplomacy”. And although this twist doesn’t necessarily contradict your conclusions but somehow milden them into less disastrous outcome.
In short,
Assuming that the bulk of the military-intelligence community in the US doesn’t really desire confronting Iran and weakening it; and the package being the least common denominator of the interests of the big powers (EU+ UK/US + RUS + CHI); and their interests being in some aspects radically divergent in the current world affairs; And since all the partners agree, at the least, that Iran doesn’t need enrichement; We might say that the only way for the current administration, strong advocate of “offensive policy in the Middle-East”, to have a “win/win” situation out of this unfavorable dilpomatic context, is to “convince” the others that Iran has more turf in its disposition than they do, and therefore they might need more sanction tools in their disposition to squeeze Iran into accepting their offer. The hidden agenda behind this ploy of almost an identical offer being re-packaged as new will then be: either loose face or face more sanctions. The rest will be just the show to frighten.
Will this be a successfull diplomatic strategy for the 5+1, thats another story.
Regards
Ataune