Negotiations over a new Iran nuclear deal hit a road block this week as outstanding Iranian demands plus last-minute demands from Russia led to a “break” in talks.
On Friday morning, European Union foreign policy chief Josep Borrell announced the break.
Borrell: “A pause in #ViennaTalks is needed, due to external factors. A final text is essentially ready and on the table … As coordinator, I will, with my team, continue to be in touch with all #JCPOA participants and the U.S. to overcome the current situation and to close the agreement.”
Iranian Foreign Minister Saeed Khatibzadeh denied external factors were derailing the process, writing, “Successful conclusion of talks will be the main focus of all … No external factor will affect our joint will to go forward for a collective agreement.”
Politico reported on March 10 that a key purpose of the break is to enable Iran and Russia to meet and coordinate the issues between themselves, writing, “talks will likely take a pause to allow for bilateral conversations between Iran and Russia.”
Journalist Stephanie Liechtenstein, who on March 9 wrote that a “draft agreement is finalized … Informal ok to the draft text by all could maybe come w/in the next 48-72 hours,” reported just a day later that “talks have reached an impasse due to Russia’s last-minute demands over EU/US sanctions exemption.
Iranian officials and media are claiming that the U.S. is to blame for the delay and suggesting that the U.S. has issued new demands, without specifying what they are.
Iranian news agency IRNA reported, “The lack of decisions in the US and its new demands have challenged the process of concluding the negotiations.” They added, “Iran made its final conclusion of the JCPOA negotiations and has presented it to the other side, and the implementation of the agreement depends on the decisions of the other side, and especially the US … in its responses, the US had raised new issues, and has created challenges in the final stage of the #ViennaTalks.”
Russia denied any responsibility for the pause, as Ambassador Mikhail Ulyanov said, “I’m not aware of any impasse…Contacts will continue. The conclusion of the deal does not depend only on Russia. There are other actors who need additional time & have additional concerns…[Remaining issues] have no relation to Russia.”
Last weekend, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that Moscow wants written guarantees from the United States that sanctions on Russia for the invasion of Ukraine will not damage cooperation with Iran.
“We need a guarantee that these sanctions will not in any way touch the regime of trade-economic and investment relations which is laid down in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” Lavrov told reporters last Saturday.
While Russian Ambassador and lead negotiator for Russia in Vienna Mikhail Ulyanov did not initially reiterate Lavrov’s demands, on March 9 he appeared to take them even further, saying, “all our trade and economic relations with Iran should be exempt from all current & future EU and US sanctions.”
The U.S. has denied that Ukraine-related sanctions are relevant to the JCPOA talks, and State Department spokesperson Ned Price reiterated that on Thursday: “The new Russia-related sanctions are wholly unrelated to the JCPOA and should not have any impact on a potential mutual return to compliance with it or its ultimate implementation … We also have no intention of offering Russia anything new or specific as it relates to the (Ukraine) sanctions, nor is anything new required to successfully reach an agreement.”
Reutersreported that the agreement text does “include a … guarantee covering nuclear cooperation between Russia and Iran.”
Several outstanding Iranian demands still supposedly await a U.S. response, further delaying an agreement.
One major obstacle remaining is the extent to which sanctions on Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) would be rolled back. Iran has continuously demanded that the U.S. remove the IRGC from its Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) list.
Additionally, Iran has requested guarantees from the U.S. that no future U.S. president will withdraw from the deal.
An apparently new demand from Iran has to do with changes in the sequencing of how an agreement would be implemented.
On this topic, U.S. Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley recently said, “The sequence of who goes exactly first and second … that’s not really the issue”
Despite the apparent setbacks, officials continued to say that a deal was close and potentially just days away.
European Union negotiator Enrique Mora: “We’re almost there. We have a text in which almost everything is done. We are at the limit of negotiating footnotes. In order to keep this good spirit & atmosphere, it’s good to pause. I’ll be working w/ all delegations to overcome this situation. The sooner the better.”
German Foreign Minister Andrea Sasse said, “the work is done … we hope and expect this will happen now.”
On Thursday, March 10, State Department spokesperson Ned Price said America was “close to a possible deal — it’s really down to a very small number of outstanding issues.”
White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki said on March 10, “our view is that we’re close. We’ve been close for some time now. The end of negotiations is always when difficult & challenging parts of the conversation typically take place.”
Russian Ambassador Ulyanov said on March 9, “maybe it will be finalized tomorrow.” Last week, Ulyanov said he is “practically sure” the deal will be approved “next week,” addingthat the deal is “almost finalized.”
In a statement submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the U.S. said “there is some but very little time remaining for steadfast diplomacy to put us on the collective path to a mutual return to full implementation of the JCPOA.”
As reports continue to come out of Vienna, Congress is increasingly demanding they be allowed to exercise their oversight role over any potential deal – and the calls for oversight are increasingly coming from a bipartisan chorus of members.
A bipartisan group of House Representatives led by Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ-5), Rep. Elaine Luria (D-VA-2) and Rep. Tom Green (R-NY-23) submitted a letter to President Biden stressing their concern over recent reports on the JCPOA negotiations, specifically, “reports indicating the potential lifting of the Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO) designation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and of the sanctions placed on members of the office of the Supreme Leader.”
The congressmen included in the letter a list of 16 questions for the administration, asking for answers within the next week and stating that no agreement should be finalized until their concerns are addressed.
Senate Republicans led by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) held a news conference yesterday afternoon criticizing the Biden administrations negotiation strategy. Comments included Sen. Jim Risch (R-WI) saying, “Stop doing business with the Russians … walk away from this deal.”
More than a month ago, Chairman of the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said, “[the administration] should walk away when they see there’s not a good deal to be had. I don’t know what the timing of that is, but whenever that is, the window is closing fast.”