The exclusive interview with the American expert comes as follow:
IRNA: Two years have already passed from the Biden administration, yet despite criticizing Donald Trump's withdrawal from the JCPOA and emphasizing the diplomacy approach, his administration has still not been able to fulfill its promise to revive the JCPOA. In your opinion, what factors other than pointing fingers at Iran, have caused the failure of the Biden administration in this regard?
Langlois: Political pressures, especially domestically, have hampered the Biden administration’s efforts to re-enter the JCPOA. This includes the US Congress, where a strong bipartisan stance against the deal exists. Previous Trump administration policies further harm negotiations, especially with respect to many different sanctions placed on Iran. This is particularly the case with the IRGC, which created a political question as opposed to a technical question with respect to sanctions lifting. The Trump administration knew this, laying a landmine that would cause a political headache for any future US administration and certainly be a sticking point for Tehran.
Honestly, the Biden administration missed its chance to re-enter the deal in early 2021 out of fear of domestic optics, although both parties have struggled immensely to negotiate amidst the politicization of the talks, especially by hardliners who prefer a hawkish stance and unrealistic negotiation goals against their adversaries in the talks.
IRNA: Considering America's record of breaking promises in various fields, especially withdrawing from JCPOA and some international treaties, do you think Washington would be a reliable party for any agreement and negotiation?
Langlois: Washington can be a reliable partner, but again the issue is political on both sides of negotiations. There is a major gap between the pro-JCPOA and anti-JCPOA camps in the United States. The situation in Iran is not necessarily different either when looking at moderates/reformers and more conservative hardliners.
Trump’s decision to pull out of the deal in 2018 was a foolish mistake, just as Iran's moves to legislate increasing uranium enrichment was illogical. These types of decisions by hardliners in both countries severely hamper progress. Further, this ideological gap causes unnecessary headaches for a good deal that would benefit both countries.
IRNA: Why does the US always use accusations and coercion and bullying – which Tehran also wouldn't budge – instead of managing the crises and resolving the conflict of its interests with the Islamic Republic of Iran through diplomacy and dialogue?
Langlois: The US uses a carrot and stick approach to Iran and most other countries. This means indirect talks (as Tehran refuses to directly speak with Washington) and unilateral coercive measures like sanctions. I do not think sanctions are an effective policy, and it is quite contradictory to apply more sanctions amidst what the Biden administration considers one of the most important foreign policy issues on its plate (i.e., JCPOA negotiations). That being said, both sides employ the carrot and stick approach just as most states do globally. I’m not justifying this as I believe simply talking is more effective than talk of “deterrence” or heightened rhetoric about conflict.
IRNA: All politicians, countries and members of the Security Council consider the JCPOA to be the best international agreement, but due to the internal events in Iran, the focus of the Western countries are on the unrest, and negotiations to revive the JCPOA are off the agenda. Given that diplomacy is always the best way to solve problems and the Biden administration always has emphasized this path, what is your solution and advice to Western countries, especially the US, to resume negotiations on JCPOA revival?
Langlois: My advice to the US and all countries involved in the JCPOA negotiations is to separate talks from all other issues. This was already well understood by all parties, although both Iran and the US continue to try to press items unrelated to the JCPOA talks. This is foolish and unnecessary – if the deal is truly a priority for both parties, they should and must make actions meet rhetoric and policy objectives in a strategic fashion. Instead, we are witnessing both sides offer reactionary responses that only hinder talks.
IRNA: Considering the importance of the Islamic Republic of Iran in the Middle East and the fact that its role in this region cannot be ignored, as well as America's breach of the JCPOA, some analysts believe that for the JCPOA revival, the Biden administration should provide incentives for Iran even outside of this agreement. What do you think and what incentives do you suggest?
Langlois: Leaning into my previous answer to [the previous] question, it’s clear talks need to be separated from all other issues. The offer of sanctions relief is and should be enough for Tehran. A simple return for sanctions relief is good for both parties – nothing else needs to be offered or negotiated at this stage because it would only further delay a return to the deal.
IRNA: Onto the Ukraine debate, the United States always expresses concern about Iran's cooperation with Russia and accuses Tehran of violating Resolution 2231, while the restrictions on Iran regarding prohibition if sending conventional weapons ended in October 2020. Also, it has not yet been officially proven that Russia is the aggressor, and if it is proven, didn't America itself help Saddam Hussain who was officially declared the aggressor against Iran and the US also provided prohibited weapons to Saddam's regime?
Langlois: I don’t necessarily care to participate in whataboutisms on security aid. No country should be selling arms or supporting Moscow in its war against Ukraine. Both support for Iraq in its war with Iran and support for Russia in its war with Ukraine can, were, and are wrong.
IRNA: Iran has officially announced that it is ready to resolve the misunderstandings. Why does the US government not encourage Ukraine to talk with Iran and resolve these misunderstandings?
Langlois: Ukraine and Iran are talking, as evidenced by the secret meeting in Oman last week. The agenda covered Iranian arms sales to Russia. The goal is to address concerns between the two countries and is a welcome sign of attempts to lower the temperature. Further, efforts to mitigate concerns and issues around the issue of Iranian arms sales to Russia will offer a great opportunity to revive JCPOA talks as Washington has stated talks are on hold in part due to Tehran’s support for Moscow in this area. The talks in Oman need to continue given their connection to the JCPOA negotiations.
Alexander J. Langlois is a foreign policy analyst, who works as an independent expert of international affairs.
4208**9417
Your Comment