The government led by President Raisi did not believe in continuing talks on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) and argued that the issue was a done deal and non-negotiable. If talks were to take place, they should solely focus on lifting sanctions, making any mention of the JCPOA meaningless and unwelcome. In fact, the word JCPOA seemed to be a “taboo” term in domestic discourse.
The insistence on this approach was extremely serious. During the then-Iranian political deputy’s trip to the capitals of three European countries after a lengthy hiatus (apparently initiated by the French side and coordinated with the other two capitals), a concerted effort was made to steer clear of mentioning the JCPOA, instead focusing solely on lifting sanctions, and nothing else.
The world is increasingly interconnected and complex, with momentous, rapid, and decisive developments that challenge countries and render their priorities obsolete for an extended period. The world is a realm of moments and opportunities.
With the previous government’s shift in approach and the unfolding events, including Russia’s invasion of Ukraine (which is seen as an attack on Europe by a European citizen and official) and the release of news about Iran’s alleged military aid to Russia, which dominated Russian and European media headlines, Europe has become increasingly disillusioned and pessimistic about engaging with Iran.
The lack of any direct contact and face-to-face dialogue, coupled with other unresolved issues, as well as the absence of any economic ties, cooperation, and exchange which resulted in a lack of economic benefits, incentives, and efforts in the relationship, caused Iran’s regional stances to go off the rails and its external relations to lose balance, rolling back the Iran-Europe relationship.
Undoubtedly, in a historical assessment of Iran-Europe relations since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, the current state of relations has never been as chilly, tense, and fragile as it is today, despite the numerous ups and downs.
Since 2022, all bonds that could have provided a semblance of dynamism and vitality to the relationship have been cut off. All aspects of the relationship, including cultural, academic, artistic, oil and energy, banking, investment, and academic exchanges between researchers, have been dismantled, leaving no tangible attraction for the continuation of relations.
The heinous and distressing events in the Middle East, the humanitarian crimes and genocide perpetrated by the occupying regime of Israel, and Iran’s distinct and divergent regional policies, have, coupled with policies European leaders who claim to advocate human rights and numerous other unthoughtful and ill-informed events, driven Europe, replete with pride and prejudice, to take hostile actions, such as imposing sanctions on several Iranian airlines and, subsequently, Iran’s shipping industry.
The EU’s ill-advised and malignant stance, marked by a new and misguided approach, has further complicated these already fraught relations, as exemplified by their unjustifiable position on Iranian islands at the Persian Gulf Cooperation Council and EU meeting, and, in a recent ill-timed move, their resolution against Iran at the recent Board of Governors meeting, adding to the complexities of these enchanted relations.
A review of recent years shows that, as a nation that has long suffered under numerous sanctions, we must not waver in our effective presence on the global stage, not even for a moment. We must not get bogged down in trivial protocols. What is crucial is leveraging all tools at our disposal, at every moment, to counter adversity and protect national interests.
In the early days of the previous government, and in a regional conference that Iran had previously viewed negatively and one-sidedly, France took the initiative to host a summit of regional leaders in Baghdad, which Iran attended at the foreign minister level. On the sidelines of this summit, the French president invited Iran’s foreign minister to visit Paris, an invitation repeated by France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian. However, Iran did not respond, as if a faction or school of thought in Tehran had concluded that relations with these countries might not be in Iran’s best interest. This entire story could have unfolded differently, particularly in light of the Iranian foreign policy priorities announced by this government, which, despite using different words, always conveyed the same message.
The priorities began with neighboring countries, followed by Russia, China, Africa, Asia, Latin America, and, finally, Europe. Even it was emphasized that Europe was not just a few countries. This explicit and repeated statement carried a connotation of disdain for Europeans, especially major countries, who, due to their pride and arrogance, would not easily forget such words. Everything that transpired in the early months was enough to create a rift between Iran and Europe. Europeans wanted to continue their professional relationship with the previous Iranian government, but conditions had changed. Later, when Iranian officials and diplomats made a concerted effort to establish contact and meet, it was too little, too late. Other events further strained the already ailing relationship, pushing it to a new low.
Now, both sides are gearing up for another round of talks to tackle a host of challenging issues. The significance lies not in the outcome, but in the fact that the meeting will take place, and perspectives will be shared.
Every meeting, no matter how difficult, will not be in vain. Negotiations may drag on longer than either side would like, but that should never be used as an excuse to call off the talks. What matters is that face-to-face, eye-to-eye negotiations can yield breakthroughs that would not be achieved through phone calls, tweets, or other means of communication.
Although the upcoming meeting between Iran and the three European countries is long overdue, we should have brought them to the negotiating table from the outset of the new government in Iran, whether overtly or covertly.
Nevertheless, there is still an opportunity to make amends. Iranian officials are right in saying that they have never walked away from the negotiating table, but this is only one aspect of the issue at hand. The forthcoming meeting, which comes after the adoption of their resolution at the Board of Governors, presents a different face of Iran, although it was reportedly agreed upon on the sidelines of the General Assembly in September. Perhaps the meeting could have been scheduled earlier or rescheduled to take place before the Board of Governors meeting. However, in diplomacy, timing and circumstances are not always in sync.
In other words, with the return of Mr. Trump and the potential escalation of European and American challenges, there is a high likelihood that Europe will seek to increase tensions with Iran to gain leverage in future negotiations.
Europe is not pleased with Trump’s return, and their irresponsible, hostile, and aggressive actions toward Iran, which have intensified in recent months, are in line with their concerns and needs. Europe may even be worried about potential contacts and openings in the communication between Iran and Trump’s America. Therefore, the upcoming negotiations with Europe, although belated, are a commendable and necessary step. If we consider the long-standing debate on the nuclear issue and the JCPOA, which is a crucial and decisive topic, and the limited time available to preserve the JCPOA, we must be diligent in managing the process and timing with them. We must convey to them a clear understanding of Iran’s stance on the Russia-Ukraine issue.
Neither the Russians nor the Europeans have the right to use Iran as a means in their own war, whether to gain an ally or to create a pretext for exerting pressure and exploiting the results in another context.
Despite all these troublesome stories of one-sidedness, simplism, and Europe’s excessive demands, both sides must acknowledge that Iran’s relations with that continent have been historical and multifaceted, characterized by cooperation in various fields. The stability and security of the region and even the world depend on relations based on mutual respect and non-interference in each other’s affairs.
What is crucial for us today is to move beyond the stagnant bilateral relations and revive meetings, discussions, and negotiations to reach a level of understanding on the nuclear issue and Resolution 2231, considering the limited time remaining. This is a daunting and challenging task, and we hope that this meeting will not be the drop that overflows the already full glass, which would be unwarranted.
History has taught us that in our absence from the international, regional, and global arenas, our rivals and adversaries will take advantage of the situation and spare no effort to undermine us.
Bahram Qassemi is a former spokesman of Iran’s Foreign Ministry.
4194
Your Comment