First round of indirect talks between Iran and the US on Iran's nuclear program ended in Muscat on Saturday. Satisfaction of the different sides and the positive atmosphere of the talks despite big diffeences was very surprising for many around the world.
To shed more light on the issue and the road ahead Tabnak reached out to Dr. Luciano Zaccara, research associate professor at Qatar University.
The Iran-US talks ended in Oman in a constructive and good atmosphere. What is your assessment?
I am positively surprised. Considering how erratic and aggressive the new policy implemented by Trump has been, I did not expect this diplomatic development.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi announced that the talks will continue next Saturday. He said: “If we can finalize the basis in the next meeting, I think we have covered a lot and we can start real talks.” What is your assessment of these words?
Considering how far the two positions are, I find his words too optimistic. However, the fact that both sides made positive comments about what happened last Saturday, there is room for hopes on further progress.
It seems that the Iranian Foreign Minister’s positive statements about the talks indicate that the framework for the talks is solely focused on the nuclear issue. What is your assessment?
If Trump pragmatic approach is the basis of the US position, it is possible to consider an exclusive deal on the nuclear file without engaging in broader discussions that would end without anything signed. We have to remember that Trump does not want a war with Iran. Instead, he wants to demonstrate that he can achieve a non nuclear Iran as neither Obama nor Biden could.
Araghchi announced that the US wants the talks to conclude quickly, while achieving this goal is difficult and will require the appropriate will of the parties. What is your assessment of the overall framework of the agreement? Will the agreed formula be a comprehensive agreement or may a temporary agreement be reached to reach a comprehensive agreement first?
The nature of the nuclear issue, the many confronted interests in the region, the past failed experiences in bilateral negotiations, and the big gap that separates both positions make it difficult to predict a quick agreement that really solves the long-term controversy. Many things have happened since 2013 that exacerbated the different approaches and added more elements to the equation. It will take much longer now to recover the trust in a diplomatic solution.
Interview by Payman Yazdani
