There are expectations that the United States and Iran could return to the negotiating table this weekend, with two senior American envoys departing for Pakistan. However, experts point to the unlikelihood of an agreement that definitively ends the conflict in the Middle East.
In an interview with CNNCarolina Pavese, professor of International Relations at the Mauá Institute, explained that there is a game of narratives between the countries involved. “”, stated the expert. Important representatives of the American government, such as Steve Witkoffspecial envoy, and Jared Kushnerare heading to negotiations, while there is an unconfirmed expectation of the participation of Iran’s foreign minister.
Vicious cycle of attacks and ceasefires
The professor highlighted that the conflict, which has lasted 57 days, follows a cyclical logic: “This game follows a logic of attacks, a ceasefire to provide relief, an attempt at negotiations to also signal that this path of diplomacy remains open, but there are agreements that never lead to anything“, explained Pavese. She recalled that on Wednesday (22) the deadline for a two-week ceasefire that Trump had announced on April 8 ended, being replaced by a new announcement that has already been.
Carolina highlighted the serious humanitarian and economic consequences of the conflict. According to her, the UN Food Agency (FAO) warned that if the closure continues, at least 45 million people could be left without food. Furthermore, the conflict has caused an increase in the cost of oil, liquid gas and other inputs, affecting several production chains, including agriculture, as many inputs necessary for the production of fertilizers pass through there.
Nuclear issue as a sensitive point
One of the most sensitive points in negotiations is the issue of . The professor explained that this issue has been the subject of long-standing dispute in Trump’s policy with Iran. During the Obama administration, an agreement was reached to monitor Iranian uranium production, which Trump left in his first term.
“Trump is now returning with a speech on the nuclear issue,” noted Pavese, recalling that when the attacks began two months ago, the argument was to overthrow the autocratic Iranian regime, with little mention of uranium. “This surprises, in a way not so much, but it goes back to this negotiation agenda and Trump then pulls this card out of his sleeve”, he analyzed, suggesting that it could be a bluff for the negotiations.
The expert also highlighted that, a week before the start of the conflict, there were diplomatic negotiations led by countries in the Middle East, mainly Oman, which signaled the possibility of a diplomatic agreement on the nuclear issue. “This is interrupted abruptly, without communication to the United States’ own allies with this attack orchestrated by Israel and Iran,” concluded Pavese, which reduces the guarantees for Iran that this time the United States will commit to diplomacy.
