EurasiaNet Eurasia Insight - Iranian Diplomats Intend to Discuss Nuclear Issue in Upcoming Talks with US officials

EURASIA INSIGHT

IRANIAN DIPLOMATS INTEND TO DISCUSS NUCLEAR ISSUE IN UPCOMING TALKS WITH US OFFICIALS
Camelia Entekhabi-Fard 3/20/06

Print this article Email this article

An air of anticipation has enveloped Nowruz, or the Iranian New Year holiday. Many Iranians, eager to see economic improvements in the country, are hopeful that pending talks between US and Iranian officials could mark the start of a rapprochement between the two countries. Meanwhile, Iranian diplomats suggest they would use the talks, which would ostensibly focus on developments in Iraq, to try to find an accommodation with the United States on Iran’s nuclear program.

Ali Larijani, chairman of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC), announced March 16 that Iranian officials were willing to sit down with US negotiators to discuss ways to promote stabilization in Iraq, which is teetering on the brink of civil war. The two sides have yet to determine a date for the talks. Iranian diplomats indicate that they want the meeting to occur in early April. However, policymakers in Washington remain divided on the Iranian offer. If Washington goes forward with the meeting, the US delegation is expected to be headed by Zalmay Khalilzad, the American envoy in Baghdad.

Iranians generally greeted the announcement enthusiastically. According to several Tehran political observers, many Iranians are concerned about the possible introduction of new international sanctions in connections with Iran’s nuclear research. [For background see the Eurasia Insight archive]. The United States has been the most zealous advocate of sanctions. Thus, Iranians view the prospect of direct talks as an opportunity for the easing of tension on the nuclear issue.

An Iranian journalist, speaking on condition of anonymity, said that despite extensive efforts of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s administration to control information on the nuclear issue, Iranians are receiving news from émigré outlets, especially those originating in the United States. Reports in recent weeks of the possible introduction of economic sanctions, or of the potential for armed conflict have alarmed many. "Keeping the [Iranian] public calm is difficult," the journalist said.

Top US officials, including Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, have insisted that the talks would not deviate from the Iraq situation. Nevertheless, Iranian diplomatic sources say Tehran wants to probe Khalilzad on the nuclear issue. "Given the opportunity of sitting face-to-face and talking, it definitely makes sense for Iran to raise other issues," said an Iranian diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity. At the same time, Iranian officials are guarded in their expectations. "We know the American ambassador in Iraq just has responsibility over his area - not more. An embassy can only do as much as it is allowed to. But any kind of talk can warm relations a little," the diplomat said.

The fact that Iranian officials want to talk with their American counterparts at all is indicative that pragmatists in Tehran have strengthened their hold on Iran’s foreign policy. [For additional information see the Eurasia Insight archive]. Since coming to power last year, Ahmadinejad’s administration has embraced a confrontational foreign policy that has increased Iran’s diplomatic isolation. Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is reportedly siding with the pragmatists and played an influential role in promoting the idea of US-Iranian talks. The fact that Larijani, a political ally of the supreme leader, disclosed the possibility of a meeting lends credence to the view that pragmatists are ascendant in Tehran, Iranian analysts say.

According to Iranian officials, Tehran decided to engage in talks with the United States after receiving an appeal from Ayatollah Mohammad Baqr al-Hakim, a top Shi’a cleric in Iraq. Some political observers in Tehran believe Hakim made the request at the prompting of Iranian officials. Hakim, they point out, spent over two decades in exile in Iran and maintains close contacts with Iranian mullahs. "Domestically, the Iranian government needs a good reason to explain to the public why they are negotiating the United States," said one University of Tehran political science professor.

Despite the apparent desire to open a channel of communication with the United States, Iranian leaders are maintaining an uncompromising stance concerning the country’s nuclear program, which they insist is designed solely to meet civilian energy needs in the coming decades. US and European Union officials, on the other hand, suspect Iran is intent on developing nuclear weapons. "Using nuclear technology is an obligation and a national demand; any going back in the nuclear field is the same as losing the country’s independence," Ayatollah Khamenei said on state television. A concession made at this stage, the supreme leader added, would cause "endless pressure" to make more compromises.

Iranian officials are comfortable in dealing with Khalilzad, who before taking up the top US diplomatic post in Iraq served as a US trouble-shooter in Afghanistan. In that capacity, Khalilzad interacted with Iranian diplomats concerning the stabilization of Afghanistan. Khalilzad, who was born and raised in Afghanistan, speaks fluent Farsi. "He [Khalilzad] worked with Iranian diplomats on the Afghanistan situation," the Iranian diplomatic source said. "He knows and we know that solving the problems dividing Iran and the United States won’t be resolved so easily."

The Central Eurasia Project aims, through its website, meetings, papers, and grants, to foster a more informed debate about the social, political and economic developments of the Caucasus and Central Asia. It is a program of the Open Society Institute-New York. The Open Society Institute-New York is a private operating and grantmaking foundation that promotes the development of open societies around the world by supporting educational, social, and legal reform, and by encouraging alternative approaches to complex and controversial issues.

The views expressed in this publication do not necessarily represent the position of the Open Society Institute and are the sole responsibility of the author or authors.