Will US solve the Iran nuclear conundrum?

So far, three rounds of indirect US-Iran talks have taken place in Oman and Italy, with more on the way. It is like the two sides are exploring the art of the possible, aiming to strike a deal without a long list of conditions or conclusions — the style of negotiations long favored by Tehran. At the same time, the negotiations seek to avoid putting off a US administration that is light on depth and substance but seems desperate to demonstrate to the world that it is in charge and has what it takes to apply the “art of the deal,” as championed by President Donald Trump. For now, this is proving elusive.

Aside from the consensus that the three rounds of talks have been “positive and productive” and that further rounds will be held to narrow their differences on a range of subjects, last Saturday’s meeting delved into some technical matters, we were told. The technical discussions will resume in the fourth round in the coming days.

The highest-level contact between these long-time foes in years is chasing a new deal that would stop Iran developing nuclear weapons — an objective Tehran denies ever pursuing — in return for sanctions relief.

But what would form a good deal for Iran, the US, Israel and the countries of the region and the world that are in a state of flux?

Limiting the enrichment of uranium to 4 percent purity — which is maybe what Iran would acquiesce to, while keeping its ability to ramp up production if needed — would be ideal. Leaving intact its updated centrifuge systems and maybe accepting in return a monitoring and inspections regime would be a victory regardless of what happens to its advanced ballistic missile program. Of course, all sanctions would also have to be lifted.

Some of the factors at play are domestic Iranian considerations, while others are international geopolitical factors

Mohamed Chebaro

A worse deal from Iran’s perspective, but which would keep Israel happy, would be one that removed all of its nuclear infrastructure and all uranium enriched up to 60 percent purity. This would be similar to the 2003 agreement that Libya made with the West, under which it gave up its nuclear, chemical, biological and ballistic missile programs in return for total rehabilitation.

Others in the region, namely Arab countries, have long wished for a far-reaching deal that could see Iran end its meddling in neighboring countries’ affairs and use of armed proxy militias to spread its influence. This was an issue that the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action nuclear deal overlooked, meaning it was seen as being in favor of Tehran.

Several factors are at play, simultaneously competing and urging such different deals to be concluded. Some of these factors are domestic Iranian considerations, while others are international geopolitical factors that could ensure a deal that ends up being in favor of Iran. That is why Tehran seems to be dangling many carrots, aiming to reduce or neutralize the rhetorical US-Israeli sticks of military destruction of Iran’s nuclear facilities.

On the domestic Iranian level, the crippling sanctions have piled pressure on the regime, whose deliverables to the citizens of Iran have long been shrinking by the day, exposing it to uprisings such as that of 2022, which was sparked by the death of Mahsa Amini in police custody. The deadly explosion on Saturday of what is believed to be a shipment of ballistic missile fuel and chemicals at Shahid Rajaee port does not bode well for a regime that is careful to cultivate a professional image among its people.

This comes on the back of a series of blows suffered since its tit for tat strikes with Israel in support of Gaza last year. These include the routing of Hamas and Hezbollah and the end of the Assad regime, which the Iranian rulers often paraded domestically as a sign of its prowess.

On the wider geopolitical level, Iran is trying to benefit from the influence Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to have on Trump, whose second term reached the 100-day landmark this week. Nowhere is this clearer than in Trump and his administration’s adoption and parroting of the Kremlin’s narrative vis-a-vis Moscow’s invasion of Ukraine being the fault of Kyiv.

Iran is trying to benefit from the influence Russian President Vladimir Putin seems to have on Trump

Mohamed Chebaro

Another indication is that the US envoy leading nearly all the White House’s initiatives and talks, Steve Witkoff, has been having regular audiences with Putin in Moscow. These are surely not only focused on the Ukraine war. They could also be touching on the geopolitical flashpoints between the superpowers — and the Iran nuclear file is likely among them.

Talking to Iran experts these days, one senses that dangling the carrot of Tehran buying American, and not European, might attract the Trump administration to strike any deal as long as it offers the prospect of an elusive Nobel Peace Prize. This could even come at the cost of US officials ignoring intricate details related to the threat a revitalized, reenergized and replenished Tehran might pose to peace and security in the Middle East and the wider world. It could be sweetened by a promise from Tehran to spend billions of dollars acquiring Boeing airplanes to renew its fleets, while also realigning its oil industry and infrastructure development along US lines of investment.

Trump whisperers in the Kremlin and beyond are no doubt encouraging him down that path. But some Iran skeptics in Europe are holding their breath over the eventuality — which is not remote — that Trump rushes to sign a deal that is worse than the original JCPOA.

Many observers believe that the world changed as a result of the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel. It has changed even more since Trump returned to the White House. But I am afraid the Iranian regime’s maximalist approach has not changed even slightly, as it still believes it can have its cake and eat it too. It is refusing to remove its religiously fueled gown of extremism for the benefit of peace and prosperity and less militarism and meddling. Yet why should it, as the world, from America to China, is lurching rightward and toward stringent conservative and populist rhetoric-fueled politics?

• Mohamed Chebaro is a British-Lebanese journalist with more than 25 years’ experience covering war, terrorism, defense, current affairs and diplomacy.