Guide to not get lost in the US-Iran negotiations: this is what experts in peace agreements expect

Guide to not get lost in the US-Iran negotiations: this is what experts in peace agreements expect

The world holds its breath at any sign that the talks between the United States and Iran, mediated by Pakistan, can reach a successful conclusion. Stock markets are anxiously awaiting the announcement of a pact to reopen the Strait of Hormuz. But there may not be a day when it is announced a major peace agreement between Washington and Tehran, but rather we have to settle for small steps, minimum texts that alleviate uncertainty in the short term. In the words of the Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, the final text “cannot be signed in 72 hours on the back of a napkin.”

In recent days, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, has once again sent contradictory signals. First, he assured on his social network Truth that the agreement with Iran was done “to a great extent”to then lower expectations and ensure that it is still very open and set new conditions. Then, this Tuesday, he decided to bomb the Iranian coasts, although he says that it is not a breach of the ceasefire but rather legitimate defense.

What is necessary for these negotiations to be successful and put an end to a conflict that is weighing down the global economy?

You don’t have to wait a big immediate all-encompassing deal but a pact to manage the conflict in the short term: cessation of hostilities, reopening of Hormuz and a commitment to address the nuclear program later, he believes Laurie Nathanexpert in peace negotiations and director of the Mediation Program at the Kroc Institute of International Peace Studies (United States). “Conflict containment, not so much conflict resolution”he explains to EL PERIÓDICO. From their point of view, the most important thing is that, beyond the extreme statements of both parties, the two sides have had opportunities to escalate and have not done so.

“This level of incompetence and lack of negotiating professionalism has never been seen. They are not even getting the basics right,” says Laurie Nathan

Among the main obstacles is what to do with the 450 kilos of uranium enriched to 60% still in the power of Iran; the moratorium on uranium enrichment that the United States wants it to be at least 20 years; how to lift the restrictions and tolls imposed by Tehran on ships that want to pass through Hormuz, and his demining; the uprising of maritime blockade that the US Navy imposes on Iranian and allied ships; he lifting of sanctions that weigh on Iran and the unblocking of the $100 billion in Iranian funds; and the future of the ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon.

The “incompetence” of Trump’s negotiators

The mediation for peace It is a discipline in itself, in which there are specialized international diplomats.

One of the problems this agreement faces is that, on the United States side, those negotiating are men without diplomatic training: Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushnerand his friend Steve Witkoffin addition to the vice president J.D. Vance. In front of them they usually have highly trained and prepared senior Iranian officials, such as the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchidiplomat, or the president of Parliament, Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf.

They do not trust the United States, justifiably: on the two occasions in which they have been bombed, negotiations on the nuclear program were taking place.

A damaged ship in the Strait of Hormuz / .

“The problem is that no one trusts the United States anymore”Nathan explains. “As a student of ceasefires and peace agreements and negotiations, I have to say that we have never seen this level of incompetence y lack of negotiating professionalism. “They’re not even getting the basics right.”

The expert recommends that Pakistani mediators insist on the creation of a Joint Commissiona body with representatives of the opposing parties and international observers that monitors compliance with the ceasefire and activates correction mechanisms if someone violates it. That is, according to Nathan, what has not happened in Gaza and Lebanon. The silence of the guns is not being respected there, especially from the Israeli side.

Asset release in phases

David Cortrightprofessor at the Reppy Institute for Peace and Conflict Studies (Cornell University, New York, United States), thinks that it would be convenient for the first agreement to already delimit the bulk of the conflictive issuesalthough stages were established to apply them.

“As for the structure of the negotiations, the natural thing is that there stages that must be addressed sequentially. But the central political agreements that are part of each phase must be treated together, as a package. Leaving the main objectives of the conversations undefined – in nuclear, economic and other matters– is a formula for endless and probably fruitless negotiations, without a comprehensive agreement,” he tells EL PERIÓDICO.

In the opinion of experts, one of the keys is that the parties do small gestures and concessions to be able to continue moving forward. A good example is the release of the 100 billion frozen Iranian funds.

The Tasnim agency, linked to the Revolutionary Guard, has reported that Iran wants a part of the funds to be released in the initial phase and that a mechanism be established to release the rest during the negotiation, while the US would have tried to link it to the final nuclear agreement.

To continue dialogue, Iran demands the immediate release of $12 billion in frozen assets in Qatar as a precondition to advance talks with the United States. In April, Reuters reported that Washington had agreed to release $6 billion from oil sales to South Korea, transferred to Qatar in 2023 but restricted to humanitarian use under US supervision.

The model of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal

“Nuclear issues are especially sensitive and are the most important. They could be resolved along the lines of the 2015 nuclear agreement, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), but it is doubtful that Trump would accept such an arrangement,” notes David Cortright.

Barack Obama appears at the White House in Washington after the nuclear deal with Iran, on July 15, 2015. / MANDEL NGAN / AFP

In 2018, President Trump canceled the text that his predecessor had signed Barack Obama with Iran over its nuclear program. That pact took a year and a half of negotiations at the highest level. And the parties had not yet faced each other in a war.

That JCPOA was not a closed pact with immediate execution, but rather a phased roadmap: Iran took verifiable steps regarding its nuclear program and allowed international inspections to verify them and, in exchange, sanctions were gradually lifted.

A calendar was then established that serves to imagine the complexity of this dossier.

First, between July 14 and 20, 2015, the agreement was politically closed and the Security Council endorsed it with resolution 2231. Iran began to modify its Fordow and Arak plant. 300 kilos of enriched uranium were taken out of Iran.

Then, on October 18 of that year, the agreement formally came into force. On January 16, 2016, the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, certified that Iran had complied with the initial nuclear measures. Most of the UN and EU sanctions were then lifted.

Everything had to continue until the so-called “transition day”, on October 18, 2023, when a deeper normalization phase was to be entered: if Iran continued to comply, more sanctions would be lifted. Finally, on October 18, 2025, the “conclusion day”, the planned closure of the file, with the end of the remaining UN and EU nuclear sanctions.

Can we expect such a detailed agreement between the Trump Administration and the Iranian regime under the authority of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei? Not in the short term.

The end of the military phase opened by the United States and Israel against Iran seems closer, but a future is not foreseeable. announcement of a great agreement with all the issues resolved soon. In view of the history of the conflict and the warnings of analysts, at most one can expect small and concrete announcements, accompanied by a lot of uncertainty. A phased negotiation that will last months, not days, and an implementation that will last years. And that can derail at any moment.

Subscribe to continue reading

source