Negotiations In Vienna…? What Is The Reaction Of The Middle East?

Rabaa Wazeer

The Middle East, in particular, and the world in general, have gained momentum in recent events, with the commencement of the 7^th   round of negotiations. The Iranian side’s recent movement has become a source of concern for the international community, as it has accelerated the pace of its nuclear programme. It has also limited access for International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) officials, raising concerns about escalating developments and the production of an Iranian nuclear bomb in violation of international agreements and threatening peace and security.

As a fact, the 7^th   round was held late last November, after the 7^th   round of discussions between Iran and the Great Six in Vienna ended without an accord. Following Iran’s recommendations, the participating delegations suggested that they work with their governments to revive the 2015 Agreement, from which the Trump administration withdrew. Given the significance of the problem to Arab and Middle Eastern security, as well as global security, the regional and international arenas have witnessed measures aimed at obtaining the maximum stability and interest.

As a result, we will attempt, via this selective view, to discuss the highlights of the 7^th   round, what is expected, and how the Arab movements are faring in the context of the stalled discussions in Vienna.

Situations in the 7^th    round of the Vienna talks

Five months after Iran suspended the round of negotiations scheduled for last June, the 7^th   round of the Iranian nuclear agreement to reach a binding agreement on the Iranian nuclear file, this round was attended by representatives of the “4 + 1” (China, Russia, Germany, France, and Britain), with an indirect American participation.

As the 7^th   round of Vienna discussions begins, the parties to the Agreement maintain their previously stated positions prior to the current session. Iran has said unequivocally that it would not be subjected to any additional nuclear commitments outside of the 2015 Agreement. The advancing missile and aircraft programmes, as well as the Middle Eastern list of pro-Tehran militias.

Other parties, particularly the United States of America, have emphasized the necessity to commit the Iranian side to an interim agreement on determining Iran’s nuclear capacity, enabling IAEA experts to visit Iranian nuclear sites. As a result, Iran has made its ideas to the other parties. Consideration of these suggestions has been postponed until meeting of the diplomats of the States involved and resuming discussions.

Iran’s Nuclear Negotiations: Prospects for Success and Failure

As the world gets closer to a deal on Iran’s nuclear capabilities, with the 7^th   round of discussions in Vienna failing and the potential of returning to the bargaining table, the following possibilities are possible:

Optimistic scenario: reviving the 2015 Agreement

The option of resuming the 2015 discussions is one of the more positive alternatives on the table, although its odds are slim due to the United States’ rejection.

pessimistic scenario: The Difficulty of Negotiations

This scenario implies that, despite the failure of the Iranian nuclear accord, the possibility of deferring the destruction of Iranian infrastructure is still on the table, particularly on the part of the US and Israel. The Allies consider this alternative to be a strong one. In the event that the talks fail, Washington has already hinted that it may resort to non-diplomatic means.

Are European intermediates effective in a linear scenario?

It is expected that the situation would be calmed down and an acceptable solution will be reached for all stakeholders in this scenario. Efforts will be coordinated between the Iranian side and the IAEA to assess the scale of Iran’s nuclear capabilities, while the parties’ surveillance systems on Iranian sites will be strengthened and developed.

Conclusion

The first is to try to press for a return to the 2015 agreement with no concessions, to obtain confirmation from the US side that it will abide by the agreement and will not withdraw from it, to lift the sanctions imposed on Iran, and to try to accelerate uranium enrichment to develop its programme, putting pressure on the other powers.

Negotiations and the possibility of reaching a binding agreement for all parties, on the other hand, remain ambiguous, which may necessitate concessions from the American side to the Iranian side, either by modifying sanctions against Iran or by attempting to draft an agreement within the framework of the nuclear agreement signed in 2015. If such attempts fail, the military option may be resorted to dissuade Iran and bring it back to the negotiation table. That choice would have major ramifications for plurality involvement, particularly for Israel. Finally, the outcome of the talks would have a significant influence on the Middle East.