On the verge of peace?
Rashed Rahman
Indications from both sides of the US-Iran war point to progress towards an interim agreement to bring about a cessation of hostilities for a 30-60 day period, with the difficult questions on which the public postures of both sides differ being relegated to further detailed discussions within the framework of the broad interim agreement. However, even at this stage, the differences are there to be read on the surface on even the eve of the interim agreement.
Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has said a final decision to sign an agreement with the US will be made by the Supreme National Security Council, with Supreme Leader Mojtaba Khamenei to have the final last word. Khamenei was injured at the start of the war in the attack that killed his father and other family members and wounded him. Since then, he has remained underground. US President Donald Trump on the other hand insists that time is on the US’s side and the negotiations with Tehran are underway in an “orderly and constructive manner. He says he has informed his team “not to rush into a deal” as “the blockade (of Iran’s ports) will remain in full force and effect until an agreement is reached, certified, and signed. Both sides must take their time and get it right. There can be no mistakes!” (as though there have not been a myriad already!). In any case, he said, Tehran could not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons at any cost. Pezeshkian has reiterated his country’s stance that Iran was not seeking nuclear weapons but would not compromise on its honour and dignity. It should be remembered that Tehran only went from 3.5 percent uranium enrichment for civilian use to 60 percent after Trump negated Iran’s deal with the Obama administration, which included International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspections. These remarks by both sides are accompanied by global leaders hailing the progress made towards reaching a peace deal in the light of reports that an agreement has been “largely negotiated”.
However, Iranian media reports that disagreement on two or three clauses persists. These issues are: the nuclear question, management of the Hormuz Straits, sanctions, the release of frozen Iranian assets and cessation by Israel of the war on Lebanon. On the nuclear issue, despite its repeated statements that it does not contemplate developing nuclear weapons, Iran is still reluctant to allow its 60 percent enriched uranium to be exported to the US (definitely a no-no) or even to neutral countries such as Russia. This simply reflects the level of distrust of Washington’s words and deeds, contradictory as these have proved in the last year or so. Iran insists on its control and permission to allow shipping through the Hormuz Straits while levying service charges. In this context it insists on the withdrawal of the US blockade of its ports. The world too is anxious to see the 20 percent of global oil flows through the Hormuz Straits restored. Iranian assets frozen by the US-led west are sorely needed by the struggling Iranian economy and must be accompanied by a phased or otherwise withdrawal of sanctions to allow Iranian oil and gas to flow freely to global markets, of whom China is the major destination. Last but not least, Iran insists Israel must stop its war on Lebanon, aimed primarily at Hezbollah. Iran has not as forcefully focused on Israeli continuing attacks in Gaza and the West Bank, which are taking a daily toll of Palestinian lives, sparing not even women and children.
Meanwhile Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif has followed up on the recent flying visit to Tehran by Field Marshal Asim Munir by expressing hopes that Islamabad will soon host another round of US-Iran talks in Islamabad, even if no signs of preparation for such talks is so far visible. A senior Prime Minister’s Office (PMO) official is quoted as saying the Prime Minister is currently in China and it seems that the next round of dialogue will not take place very soon. Here too, contradictory signals rule the roost.
The US President, despite Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s urging, seems, despite the contradictory signalling that is the hallmark of his Presidency, to have come to the conclusion that continuing the very expensive war on Iran will provide little benefit and may further degrade his popularity at home. Whatever the aims of the war were (and there are as many versions as speakers on the issue), it now appears Trump has accepted the impossibility of attaining those goals through military means and has instead plumped for negotiations under the umbrella of an extended ceasefire. If only he and his administration had quelled their exaggerated vision of global hegemony being available on a plate because of US military might and calculated soberly, the loss of lives, weapons and materiel could have been avoided. What a waste.
rashed-rahman.blogspot.com
