Biden’s return to Iran deal increasingly difficult

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates – Iran and USA do not disappoint.

President Joe Biden’s government wants to revive the 2015 nuclear deal, but demands to see changes in Tehran before lifting the heavy sanctions the Trump team imposed on the country.

Meanwhile, Iran says it wants Washington to step up its game and take the first step, refusing to move until the sanctions are lifted.

Iran has set a deadline on Sunday, February 21, promising that if oil and banking sanctions are not lifted by then, it will prevent UN inspectors from gaining access to its nuclear facilities.

The political malice raises questions about Biden’s plans to deliver on a deal that has supported lifelong support since former President Donald Trump pulled the US out of it in 2018.

The Iranian nuclear deal, also known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was spearheaded by the Obama administration and involved several other world powers. It lifted international sanctions against Iran, offering the country 83 million in economic relief, in exchange for its nuclear program, which includes inspections by the United Nations International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Any removal of IAEA inspectors “would make an agreement much harder to reach; without mechanisms to monitor Iran’s nuclear program, the distrust of the US and the remaining parties at the JCPOA would deepen,” said Torbjorn Soltvedt, head of MENA analyst at Verisk Maplecroft, written in a research note this week.

The ultimatum is intended to push Washington into action. But it could backfire, says Behnam ben Taleblu, a senior fellow of the Washington Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

Iran’s deadline threat ‘is’ intended to increase risks and fears in Washington about the direction of the nuclear program. “Risks and fears that Tehran hopes Washington will improve with concessions and premature easing of sanctions,” Taleblu told CNBC.

But the compounded nuclear violations – even under Biden – “could help drive Europe to Washington, which now has a more limited Iran policy,” he warned.

And the Islamic Republic did not hesitate to violate the terms of the agreement after the election of Biden, in steps that the former JCPOA negotiators described as ‘challenging’ and ‘serious’. The interests have been increasing since May 2019, one year after the Trump administration withdrew from the agreement and began imposing a maximum sanction on the country for the country it calls ‘destabilizing regional behavior’.

Iranian officials have previously stressed that the violations are reversible once Washington provides sanction relief.

But the relief is unlikely soon, as Biden’s goals with the deal are lacking support from most of Congress, and his team wants to avoid making Iran look ‘soft’.

According to Sanam Vakil, an Iranian expert and deputy head of Chatham House’s MENA program, it’s not as much a game of chicken as it seems.

“It’s not really a chicken. It’s actually about the Biden government determining how they want to proceed and doing the execution and transition, and the domestic problems in the US have stimulated a quick entry to a bit,” she said. .

And the standoff, Vakil believes, is more a debate about the order in which certain concessions will be made.

“What we’re seeing unfolding in the public domain is a debate about order,” she said.

“The Iranians are saying in public, ‘We need you to lift all sanctions before we do anything.’ And, of course, they are going to say because they need to know where the US stands, what the American red lines are – they currently have limited confidence in the process. ‘

Henry Rome, a regional analyst at Eurasia Group, says the government in Biden “is considering making an initial gesture to Iran aimed at showing commitment to return to the JCPOA and urging Iran to to accept negotiations without giving away significant US leverage. “

Such a move would be largely symbolic, but could include lifting sanctions against individuals, removing US objections to an IMF loan or facilitating humanitarian trade.

“If the US offers a tangible sign of progress before (February 21), it could be enough for the Iranian leadership to advance the conditions,” Rome said.

Finally, what is most important on June 18 is the survival of the agreement and the relations between the US and Iran – the presidential election in Iran, which could elect a much tougher and anti-American leader.

The run-up to the election ‘will give a clearer indication of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s willingness to endorse another serious attempt to reach an agreement’, said Verisk’s Soliskvedt.

“An agreement between Iran and the US ahead of time is an extraordinary prospect, and the risk that Khamenei will walk away from the JCPOA this year will remain high.”