Biden has undermined trust with Iran - GulfToday

Biden has undermined trust with Iran

Michael Jansen

The author, a well-respected observer of Middle East affairs, has three books on the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Joe-Biden-750

Joe Biden

Last week European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell urged Washington and Tehran to accept the final draft of the 2015 agreement curbing Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for lifting sanctions. In an appeal published by the Financial Times, Borrell said that following 15 months of talks in Vienna, he has “concluded that the space for additional significant compromises has been exhausted.” He stated the text on the table “addresses in precise detail, the sanctions lifting as well as the nuclear steps needed to restore the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action),” from which Donald Trump pulled out in 2018 and slapped 1,500 sanctions on Iran.

Borrell argued, “This text represents the best possible deal.” Although “not perfect,” it addresses all “essential elements and includes compromises by all sides. Now is the time to seize this unique opportunity.”

However, Borrell was forced to admit that return to the JCPOA is “politically polarising in Washington” due to bipartisan opposition to the deal and mid-term Congressional elections while in Tehran there are reservations that the JCPOA could be abandoned again in 2025 by a successor to the Biden administration.

Neither Iran nor the US has agreed to accept the text on offer or Borrell’s contention that the deal does not need altering and his job, as mediator, is finished. Iranian chief negotiator Ali Bagheri Kani responded by tweeting that Tehran has its own ideas — “in substance and form” but did not reveal them. The US State Department spokesman Ned Price said that the Biden administration will review the deal, claimed that Washington had been prepared to accept it since March” and blamed Iran for preventing finalisation.

Stringing out negotiations indefinitely does not mean the moribund deal is dead. Although Borrell is clearly fed up with the bazaar bargaining process, both sides seek to preserve the JCPOA because neither has a Plan B and both could benefit from its revival. Price was being disingenuous when he said the Biden administration was prepared to accept the deal since March this year because both sides have continued to dicker.

The current sticking point is the US refusal to remove from its “terrorism” list Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). While Iran has ceased calling for delisting, it demands that sanctions be lifted on IRGC-affiliated companies and institutions which are major players in the public, semi-private and private sectors of the economy. Maintaining sanctions on these bodies could restrict economic growth once sanctions are lifted on non-IRGC-connected firms and organisations.

During his presidential election campaign Joe Biden pledged to return to the JCPOA and gave the impression that this would be a priority for his administration if he entered the White House. Although he began his term in office by signing 17 executive orders on January 20th, 2021, inauguration day, the piece of paper restoring US adherence to the deal was not among them. If it had been, the situation would be very different.

If the US would have re-entered the JCPOA and lifted sanctions, Iran, the US, this region, and the international community would have benefitted.

Iran would have returned to compliance and developments in its nuclear programme would have been frozen before major technical successes were achieved over the past 18 months. The Iranian economy would have been given a boost and in the June 2021 election, Iran might have elected a moderate who would be prepared to negotiate on other issues. Instead, hardliner Ebrahim Raisi won the presidency.

Biden would have had a solid foreign policy triumph early in his first term and might have been able to secure US objectives in negotiations with Iran over its ballistic missile programme and regional activities which the US opposes.

Countries in this region would not have to worry about the possibility that Iran would acquire nuclear weapons — which, so far, Tehran as abjured as “haram,” prohibited by Islam.

Iran would not be isolated and feel itself constantly under threat from Israel and the US and could pursue reconciliation and trade with its neighbours.

The international community would not have to worry about the proliferation in this region of nuclear weapons beyond the considerable arsenal of bombs and warheads in Israel’s arsenal.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman warned in 2018, “If Iran developed a nuclear bomb, we will follow suit as soon as possible” although this would violate Riyadh’s commitment to the non-proliferation treaty. Saudi Arabia is currently negotiating with South Korea over the construction of two nuclear power plants and independent uranium enrichment facilities. Turkey and Egypt could also consider this possibility.

Instead of promptly and unconditionally re-entering the JCPOA, Biden dithered, prevaricated and procrastinated due to anti-Iran and pro-Israel pressure which has built up over the past 15 months of off-and-on negotiations. He has undermined the slender trust he had with a sceptical Iran by refusing to re-enter the deal and adding more sanctions.

Biden followed the bad example of politicians the world over by not delivering on a key election pledge. To make matters worse, by sticking to Trump’s policy towards Iran, Biden forgot he was elected by a whopping majority primarily because he is NOT Trump.

The Vienna talks opened in early April 2021 with bickering over which side must be first to return. As the US withdrew from the JCPOA, Tehran quite rightly argued that the US should re-enter the deal and begin lifting sanctions before Iran commences the process of resuming compliance. This involves returning to limits set by the JCPOA on uranium enrichment, stockpiling, and centrifuges used for enrichment as well as returning to full cooperation with the intrusive International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regime of monitoring Iran’s nuclear facilities.

A year after Trump withdrew from the deal and launched his “maximum pressure” campaign by piling sanctions upon sanctions with the aim of compelling Tehran to capitulate to a dozen US demands, Iran began to gradually reduce compliance. Iran exceeded the uranium purification limit of 3.67 by enriching to 20 and then 60 per cent, and amassed stockpiles exceeding 300 kilograms. Iran also restricted the activities of IAEA inspectors. Iran argues that its return to compliance is not complicated and can be achieved within months if not weeks. However, as long as the deal remains unsigned, Iranian scientists will continue to advance their country’s nuclear programme and gain knowledge and expertise in enrichment and constructing state-of-the-art equipment for this purpose. The scientists will not waste the time wasted in political posturing.

Related articles

Majority of US voters support the deal with Iran

US presidential candidate Joe Biden promised to return to the 2015 agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for lifting sanctions. Instead, President Biden sticks to the dangerous and destructive policy dictated by Donald Trump who withdrew from the deal in 2018 and slapped 1,500 punitive sanctions on Iran.

Biden hesitates although 54 per cent of registered US voters support a deal while only 20 per cent oppose; among Biden’s Democrats the number is 70 per cent backers and six per cent opponents; among independents 50 per cent support and 30 per cent do not; and 41 per cent of Republicans are in favour against 35 who are not.

Since Biden’s own positive rating is currently a low 41 per cent against 56 per cent negative rating, it would seem it would behove him to re-enter the deal. The main obstacle is Tehran’s insistence that the US must lift Trump’s designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRG) as a “foreign terrorist organisation,” making the IRG the world’s sole national army to join a host of armed non-state actors.

The text, a somewhat amended version of the original document, has been ready for months and awaits finalisation. Why then is Biden procrastinating and prevaricating? He faces stiff opposition from domestic anti-Iran lobbyists and legislators and Israel where the government rejects the deal. In both countries military and intelligence experts are, however, in favour. They hold, correctly, that Tehran has made great strides in developing both nuclear expertise and output since Trump pulled out, prompting Iran to gradually reduce its adherence in retaliation.

Instead of being limited to 3.67 uranium enrichment Iran has 43 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium: this is a few steps away from the 90 per cent needed for a bomb. Instead of having a 300 kilogram stockpile of 3.67 enriched uranium, Iran has a stock 18 times larger of uranium enriched above the 3.67 per cent level permitted. Instead of carrying out enrichment with old, approved centrifuges, Iran has employed advanced centrifuges.

Instead of abiding by the stringent monitoring regime put in place by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has been slipping surveillance. Until Iran began to breach the regulatory regime, it was the toughest on earth.

Nevertheless, Iran has pledged to revert to the deal once the US re-enters and to halt enrichment above 3.67 per cent, export all but 300 kilogrammes of the permitted 3.67 per cent of material in its stockpile, revert to old centrifuges which have been warehoused, and re-engage fully with the IAEA monitoring effort.

Opponents of the deal argue its “sunset clauses” will expire by 2031, thereby ending restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities. This may be addressed in the new deal.

However, they also contend it fails to curb in Iran’s ballistic missile programme and sup- port for Lebanon’s Hizbollah, Yemeni Houthi rebels, Iraqi Shia militias and the Syrian government.

Since these issues are outside the purview of the 2015 deal, Iran rightly rejects including them in its successor. Tehran has also made it clear that they can be discussed directly with the US once Biden re-joins the deal and sanctions are lifted.

After months of trying to get the external issues incorporated into the nuclear deal, the Biden administration conceded that this is impossible.

On April 29th this year, Secretary of State Antony Blinken told lawmakers that the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign had failed and “produced a more dangerous nuclear programme” while Iran stepped up involvement in regional affairs. These post-Ukraine war remarks suggested that the Biden administration was ready to return to the deal.

However, the administration continues to blow hot at one moment and cold another. Last week Washington may have blown up the deal. At the 35-member IAEA board of governors meeting in Vienna the US — along with acolytes Britain, France, and Germany — secured the adoption of a resolution critical of Iran over its inability or refusal to account for traces of nuclear material at three undeclared sites found by IAEA monitors in 2019 and 2020.

The resolution, which received 30 votes in favour — with Iran and Russia voting against and India, China and Libya abstaining — urges Iran to co-operate “without delay” with inspectors after IAEA director Rafael Grossi reported he had not received a “technically credible” explanation for the presence of particles.

Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi pointed out that uranium “contamination” was possible “in a country as vast as Iran.” He also suggested “human sabotage” by Israel which is blamed for repeated attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and assassinations of Iranian scientists.

Iranian officials are suspicious due to the fact that former Israeli Prime Minister Bin- yamin Netanyahu instigated visits by IAEA inspectors to one of the three contaminate sites at the village of Turquzabad near Tehran. IAEA monitors took soil samples and concluded that there were “traces of radioactive material” at the location which may have been used for storage as there were no signs of processing. How did Netanyahu know there were samples at this site?

Although the IAEA still has more than 40 cameras which will continue to operate at Iran’s enrichment facilities, Grossi stated Tehran’s action mounted to a “serious challenge.” He warned that in three or four weeks the agency would be unable to provide “continuity of knowledge” about Iran’s activities. “This could be a fatal blow” to negotiations over the nuclear deal, he stated.

He also warned that Iran is “just a few weeks” away from having enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb. However, Iran halted work on weaponisation in 2003 and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has repeatedly stated that Iran will not manufacture nuclear weapons as they are prohibited by Islam.

Kelsey Davenport of the “independent” Washington-based Arms Control Association told the BBC that in ten days or less Iran could transform its current stock of 60 per cent enriched uranium into the 90 per cent required for weapons. She said, however, that manufacturing bombs would require one or two years.

If Biden continues dithering the deal could die, further destabilising an already unstable region.

Michael Jansen, Political Correspondent

12 Jun 2022