01.09.2022

Nearing an n-deal

Despite Israeli military provocations and strenuous diplomatic objections, a deal on Iran’s nuclear programme is on the cards, writes Yassamine Mather

The marathon Iran nuclear negotiations are continuing. However, in the absence of any reliable information from either Iran’s Islamic Republic or the ‘five plus one’ powers, the furious reaction of Tel Aviv to the latest version of a proposed deal tells us we are approaching a crucial stage.

The Israeli government and media seem obsessed with the proposed deal. In fact if Iranian people - or indeed US, European, Russian or Chinese citizens - want to find out what is going on, the best place to begin is with the Israeli press. An August 28 headline in Ha’aretz announced: ‘US listening to Israel, but deal with Iran is done’. The article explains:

… the decision to sign the agreement has probably already been made by the Biden administration and the actual signing now depends mainly on acceptance by Iran. As for the military threat, the United States neither wants nor intends to attack the Iranian nuclear sites, while Israel has only recently renewed - tardily and after years of neglect - preparation of its military option, which is unlikely to be relevant in the coming years.

Instead of jaw, jaw, it is clear that Israel wants war. According to reports on August 24 in the Saudi press (Saudi Arabia is nowadays a close ally of Israel) Israeli F35 stealth fighters have been entering Iranian airspace on multiple occasions over the last two months. In what the Saudi Elaph online newspaper called “massive drills”, the F-35s were apparently testing mid-air refuelling and, moreover, they managed to evade Russian and Iranian radar.

Later the same week, as optimism over a potential deal grew, the Israeli government made yet another bid to persuade Washington to drop peace for war. Defence minister Benny Gantz - a committed opponent of the Iran nuclear deal - travelled to the United States for a meeting with US national security advisor Jake Sullivan in Washington. He also visited the US army central command (Centcom) in Florida.

Obviously Gantz did not meet with success. So, on August 28 news came that David Barnea, the director of Mossad, the Israeli security agency, will be going to Washington next week. Barnea has been quoted by the Israeli press, saying that the deal was “very bad for Israel” and “based on lies”.¹ Meanwhile Israel’s prime minister, Yair Lapid, called on the US to lay down a “credible military threat” to force through a better agreement. After all, violence is “the language Iran understands”.²

By August 29 ex-premier Binyamin Netanyahu was entering the fray. After a briefing by the government, the current opposition leader accused Lapid and Gantz of “falling asleep on the job” over the past year and said they should be lobbying the US Congress and speaking out in the American media. Referring to the coming Israeli elections in autumn he added: “I have a clear message for the ayatollahs in Tehran: on November 1, we’ll bring strong and decisive leadership to Israel that will ensure that, with or without a deal, they will never have nuclear weapons.”

Concessions

On the same day, the Persian-language press, inside and outside Iran, was quoting Israeli sources that gave more details of the supposed deal. These reports talk of an agreement that includes four stages over five months:

Iran is by then supposed to rescind all its violations of the original accord, to transfer all the uranium it has enriched to other countries, and to cease the operation of and dismantle the centrifuges which were activated in violation of the accord.³

A report in Al-Jazeera claimed that some sanctions will be lifted immediately:

According to the unconfirmed reports, some 150 Iranian financial entities and 17 banks will be removed from the sanctions list on the day the agreement is finalised, and Iran will start immediately but gradually rolling back its nuclear advances.

Moreover, $7 billion worth of Iranian assets frozen by South Korea will be released, while Iran will gain two and a half years of guaranteed US sanctions relief, which equates to a total of five and a half years, even if a Republican wins office in 2024 …⁴

However, despite the triumphalist claims of the Raisi government in Iran, in reality it is Iran’s Islamic Republic that has made a number of major concessions. Iran’s demand for the granting of compensation and assurance to international companies in case the US withdraws from the deal has been rejected. Iran also wanted to rejoin the Swift international clearing service and, although the US has made it clear it will not object to Iran’s application, the Biden administration insists that this will depend on a separate agreement between Iran and Swift. Nor does it look as though Tehran’s demand to remove the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps from the list of organisations targeted by sanctions has been met.

However, a number of companies owned by or associated with the IRGC will be removed. In addition, all sanctions imposed on Iran by the Trump administration will be ended and, although Iran’s other demand - a guarantee that a future US administration will not be able to renege on the deal - has not been met, the Biden administration will give a written commitment not to withdraw from the agreement as long as Biden is president. Iran will be able to obtain the $100 billion worth of assets that are now frozen in bank accounts across the world, as well as selling 50 million barrels of oil over the first 120 days, eventually reaching 2.5 million barrels a day (1.5 million more than it sells now).

Everyone from Israel to the US and Iran agree that technical nuclear issues, such as the extent of uranium enrichment and its quality, and the method of monitoring nuclear installations, were agreed in the initial stages of negotiations. In fact they were more or less what were arrived at in the initial JCPOA agreement.

The pro-government press in Iran is hailing the putative deal as a great achievement, as it will remove sanctions - not to mention Biden’s willingness to put the new deal to a vote in the Congress, claiming that this will meet Iran’s demand for guarantees that the US will not withdraw this time. Apparently some in the Islamic Republic are under the impression that this was Obama’s mistake! Of course, no-one can be sure that Congress will vote for the deal, but again the assumption in Tehran is that Biden would veto any negative resolution. All this adds urgency to the process, as nobody knows what will happen with the midterm US elections.

Iran predicated its signing and the implementation of the accord on European companies being allowed to operate and invest in Iran without suffering sanctions as a result. The US responded by saying that it was prepared to allow international companies, including European corporations, to operate in Iran, but it could not oblige them to invest there!