How Tehran enters ...
Page 1
The Omanis, however, play an important role regarding the Strait of Hormuz, as Iran and Oman form the two sides of the strait at its narrowest point. Part of the consultations and discussions could be tied to that issue, which remains one of the key matters on the table.
Russia, meanwhile, is a member of the United Nations Security Council and holds veto power, so its role can carry weight in that arena. Consultations with Russia may also reflect a strategic balancing approach. It should also not be forgotten that Russia was among the countries that played a role in past negotiations related to the nuclear agreement known as the JCPOA, and it could again contribute to addressing some of the major outstanding disputes as a party sufficiently familiar with these issues.
One possibility raised regarding Russia concerns the transfer of Iran’s enriched uranium. Russia previously did this under the JCPOA and has now signaled readiness to receive the material again. Yet such an arrangement is now open to doubt, because for Tehran, more important than to whom these stockpiles would be handed over is whether the material should leave the country at all.
One of the considerations at play is the uncertainty and lack of trust associated with the American side. That is why Iran sees it as a risk to transfer enriched uranium stockpiles abroad all at once or in full. Instead, Iran has announced that it has no objection to diluting the material in several stages, so that both the concerns of the other side are addressed and Iran’s own considerations are preserved. But Washington appears to view enriched material in symbolic terms, as something that could be used to declare victory. The United States may be driven less by a technical concern than by a political consideration.
What explains the deliberate information blackout Pakistan has referred to? Does it signal the talks are entering a more sensitive and detailed phase, or, on the contrary, is it meant to manage the fragility of the negotiations?
Lately, too many issues have been pushed into the open and publicized in the media. Rather than being pursued confidentially behind the scenes, they have been played out in the media, especially by the United States. The more public diplomacy of this kind becomes, the more it can suffer damage. This can create obstacles and conditions in which dialogue, interaction, and sometimes flexibility diminish, causing the process to move slower than expected and, in some cases, grind to a halt.
For that reason, issues now need to be pursued away from the media, rather than in the form of political and propaganda maneuvering aimed at pressuring the other side.
But the American side has generally not shown such an approach in the past, and even now, during negotiations, it is taking positions not entirely aligned with that principle. It remains to be seen how the Pakistanis can manage this moving forward. More confidentiality helps the talks; less confidentiality hardens the environment for negotiators and their capitals alike. This is unlikely to signal entry into the detailed phase of negotiations, because the parties have not yet reached an understanding even on the frameworks. At this stage, it may be more a phase requiring major decisions.