Agreement with America: Iran sets its conditions and insists on its economic rights
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf announced his country's firm stance on the ongoing negotiations with Washington, emphasizing that Tehran will not agree to any deal with the United States that does not include clear and complete guarantees for the rights of the Iranian people. His remarks came at a sensitive time, amid increasing diplomatic initiatives to end the tensions plaguing relations between the two countries. He stressed that Iranian negotiators do not trust the promises of the other side and that any understanding must be based on concrete foundations.
Background to the tension and the complex course of negotiations
The roots of the current tensions lie in US President Donald Trump’s 2018 decision to withdraw from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the nuclear agreement reached in 2015 between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers. Following the withdrawal, Washington reimposed crippling economic sanctions on Tehran, aiming to exert “maximum pressure” to force it to negotiate a new agreement on stricter terms. In response, Iran began gradually reducing its compliance with the nuclear commitments outlined in the agreement, leading to a dangerous escalation in the region and heightened international concerns about its nuclear ambitions.
Dimensions of any agreement with America and its potential effects
The significance of any potential agreement between Tehran and Washington extends far beyond bilateral ties, casting a long shadow over the regional and international landscape. Domestically, Iran considers the lifting of sanctions and the release of its frozen assets abroad a fundamental right for reviving its severely damaged economy. Regionally, reaching an understanding would contribute to reducing tensions in the Strait of Hormuz, the strategic waterway through which a large portion of the world's energy supplies pass, and could positively impact the stability of other countries in the Middle East. Internationally, the world is closely watching these negotiations, as their success would represent a victory for diplomacy and nuclear nonproliferation efforts, while their failure could lead to a nuclear arms race in the region and increase the likelihood of direct confrontation.
Washington's strict conditions versus Iran's "red lines"
Qalibaf's remarks come amid media reports, including those carried by newspapers like The New York Times, indicating that the Trump administration has sent a new proposal to Tehran with more stringent conditions. Iran, for its part, is holding firm to its demands, which it considers "red lines," chief among them obtaining economic and legal guarantees to prevent a repeat of the US withdrawal from any future agreement. This divergence in positions reflects the deep mistrust between the two sides and makes reaching a compromise extremely difficult, as each seeks to maximize its gains while offering minimal concessions.
