The Donald Trump administration should stop sending mixed signals to Iran about its position in the “nuclear” negotiations. This was stated on May 20 by the country’s supreme leader Ali Khamenei. He added that the dialogue through Omani intermediaries is fruitless, because the United States is seeking Tehran’s consent to “zero enrichment,” which contradicts its national interests. In private conversations, Iranian officials make it clear that they are considering whether it is possible to leave the negotiation process.
“I would like to issue a warning to the opposite side,” Iran’s supreme leader said on May 20, addressing the Trump administration. Khamenei urged U.S. officials involved in “nuclear” consultations with the Iranians in Oman “not to talk nonsense.”
“It is a big mistake to say that you will not allow Iran to enrich itself. We don’t need anyone’s permission,” Rahbar said. He stated that now, as at the dawn of Joseph Biden’s presidential term, the US-Iranian negotiations are underway, but without any tangible progress. “And now we don’t think they will lead to any result. It is unclear what will happen next,” the Supreme leader concluded.
This is probably how the supreme leader of Iran, in whose hands the mechanism of state decision-making is concentrated, responded to the comments of the US President’s special envoy for the Middle East, Stephen Witkoff. The other day, Witkoff, in an interview with ABC, noted that the Trump administration has one “clear red line” in the framework of negotiations with Iran. “We cannot give permission for even 1% of the uranium enrichment capacity,” explained the special representative, who had previously publicly admitted compromise options. “It all starts with our principled position, namely, with a deal that does not include the possibility of enrichment.” According to him, even low enrichment is the way to create nuclear weapons.
In private conversations, Iranian officials claim that now the authorities of the Islamic Republic doubt whether a new round of negotiations with the United States is necessary, which is scheduled to take place on a neutral site this week. “The hesitations (of representatives of the Trump administration. – “NG”) on the issue of enrichment, and now the public statements of the United States about “zero enrichment” have provoked (in Tehran. – “NG”) internal discussions about the expediency of participating in further negotiations now, the Western edition of Amwaj media quotes one of its sources in Tehran. “It seems that it has not yet been decided whether the Iranians will participate in the fifth round of negotiations with the United States, which is expected to take place later this week.”
Yesterday, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi stressed that Iran’s enrichment technology is a success that the country has been striving for for decades through “sacrifices, both in terms of blood and resources.” “There is no scenario in which the Iranians will deviate from this path,” he stressed. – If the United States is really interested in Iran not possessing nuclear weapons, a deal is quite achievable. We are ready for a constructive conversation in order to reach a solution that guarantees this result forever. But Iran’s enrichment will continue, with or without an agreement.” Araghchi noted that the United States has the right to make some statements for its domestic audience, but this should happen without much fanaticism.
Moreover, Tehran is ready to discuss even different formats of international inspections in order to prove the peaceful nature of its developments. “If our opponents really do not want to allow Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons, given that our nuclear program has been and remains peaceful, we are ready to discuss various measures with the IAEA to demonstrate that our nuclear program will under no circumstances be of a military nature,” Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Bagai said on May 19. – But if the true goal of the other side is to completely stop the Iranian nuclear industry and stop uranium enrichment, then the very essence of the issue changes. It won’t work that way.”
Iran has now received a proposal from the United States regarding the time and venue of the fifth round of talks, and this message is being discussed, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi said. According to him, the negative atmosphere for dialogue is created not only by the wavering position of the United States, but also by the ongoing “unilateral punitive measures, often presented as tools of diplomacy.” “As part of the so–called maximum pressure policy, disruptions in the supply of vital medicines and equipment are particularly acute: many cancer patients and patients with chronic diseases remain without necessary treatment,” the diplomat said.
The message Iran was trying to convey to its interlocutors during previous rounds of meetings was simple, sources in the Emirati edition of The National say. “We know that you (USA. – “NG”) do not like the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (the original 2015 nuclear deal, from which the United States unilaterally withdrew during Trump’s first term due to dissatisfaction with Iran’s overall policy. – “NG”), and we don’t like him anymore either,” one of the interlocutors tells The National the essence of Iran’s position. – But we believe that his logic (of the JCPOA text. – NG) is still relevant – it is the strengthening of trust and transparency in our peaceful nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of sanctions.”
It is possible that Iran’s toughened position was influenced by reports in a number of Israeli and American publications that disagreements between the United States and Israel are growing, primarily over the Gaza Strip. Their clear sign was that during his Middle East tour, Trump did not make the traditional stop for US presidents in the Jewish state. The government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been a proponent of a powerful strike on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure in the event that the U.S.-Iranian negotiation process fails. Perhaps now Tehran feels that the danger from its main regional opponent is weakening, mainly due to the loss of influence over the White House.