Country leaders are increasingly talking about a "nuclear deal" with Iran. Why it matters

The Iranian Foreign Ministry announced the resumption of negotiations with Europe on the nuclear deal. The agreement, reached with the participation of the US, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China in 2015, required Tehran to abandon the development of nuclear weapons in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. But as early as 2018, the new US administration under President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the agreements. Why the United States torpedoed the deal, which suited everyone, and what are the chances of its restoration - in the material of "Izvestia".

Prospects for a return to the nuclear deal

- IAEA head Rafael Grossi said in mid-November about the possibility of resuming the agreement, specifying that this would require thorough inspections. In Iran, he visited the Natanz nuclear power plant, which has previously come under Israeli attacks, and the Fordow uranium enrichment research center. It was the first inspection since 2021, when Iran finally withdrew from the nuclear deal and closed access to its nuclear facilities to the agency.

- According to Tehran's position, the Islamic Republic has "never left the negotiating table" and the ball is currently in the court of the "Big Three" countries, which include the US, Britain and France. Iran has emphasized that negotiations should be conducted "based on our national interests and our inalienable rights" and not from a position of pressure and intimidation, and promised an immediate response to any IAEA resolution. The country also demanded compensation for the sanctions imposed on it, the damage from which, according to the Iranian side, reached $1 trillion.

- During the U.S. election race in September 2024, President-elect Donald Trump announced that he was open to negotiations on the "nuclear deal" with Iran and promised to push for an agreement. The next White House chief believes Tehran's pursuit of nuclear weapons could pose a threat. According to analysts, the change in rhetoric was influenced by the depletion of weapons stockpiles due to arms deliveries to Ukraine and the risk of facing a major escalation in the Middle East.

- Since the agreement was terminated in 2018, calls for its renewal from the UN, Iran and Russia have been made almost annually. Despite the leaders' statements, a return to the nuclear deal as it was signed in 2015 is no longer possible, analysts believe. This is due to the fact that Trump may stick to the tactics of forceful pressure, which will definitely not go in favor in negotiations with the Iranian side.

- Judging by who the president-elect appoints to posts in his future administration (we analyzed Trump's team in detail here here), his entourage is dominated by those who consider Iran a threat, and therefore any steps towards Tehran are out of the question. Besides, any agreement between the two countries will be opposed by Israel, at least as long as the militarist Benjamin Netanyahu is prime minister. But the main obstacle to a deal is called the worsening crisis in the Middle East.

Breaking the JCPOA

- In 2018, US President Donald Trump officially announced that the US was pulling out of the "nuclear deal" negotiated by previous US leader Barack Obama. The agreement was torn up under the pretext that Iran was allegedly continuing to develop nuclear weapons. At the time, Trump viewed the deal as strengthening Tehran. However, the expert community agrees that no one benefited from the termination of the JCPOA.

- After unilaterally withdrawing from the agreements and returning all the sanctions suspended against the republic, Washington hoped to achieve new concessions from Iran with the help of economic pressure. The U.S. proposed to create an additional agreement with more stringent conditions that would not only deprive Iran of the possibility of creating nuclear weapons, but also prevent the development of the "peaceful atom" in the country. Washington planned to formulate the agreement without the participation of Iran, Russia and China. Analysts call the U.S. actions in this situation absolutely illegal: they did not receive support from the participants of the JCPOA.

- In accordance with the terms of the agreement, the re-imposition of sanctions on Iran serves as a basis for the termination of its obligations in full or in part. Nevertheless, Tehran decided to adhere to the agreements and continued to cooperate with the IAEA until 2019, when it announced the reduction of obligations under the JCPOA, and began to increase the stockpile of low-enriched uranium. According to analysts, this was done in order to restore the country's position, weakened by steps to implement the nuclear deal, for the next stage of negotiations.

Russia's position

- The Russian Foreign Ministry notes that against the background of declarative statements about the benefits of the JCPOA, the US continues to torpedo the agreement under far-fetched reasons and accuse Iran of some "escalatory steps." The administration of current White House chief of staff Joe Biden has actually completed the collapse of the nuclear deal, and European countries have followed suit, sabotaging attempts to restore the agreement.

- Despite Iran's intention to return to the deal and efforts by Russia and China to restore the JCPOA, Washington and Brussels have not shown any willingness to honor the agreements. Russia is now assuming that UNSC Resolution 2231 is still in effect and all parties to the agreement, including the US, UK, Germany and France, must "correct their violations and bring their policies into strict compliance with the requirements of the Security Council."

- The West's perfidy of the nuclear deal was repeated in the case of the Minsk agreements with Russia. The Kremlin also notes that Russia's and Iran's approaches to the global agenda are close or fully coincide: the countries are united by the desire to form a just multipolar world order and to comply with international norms.

Why it matters

- The confrontation between the two nuclear "superpowers" - the USSR and the US - once led to the cessation of conflicts, as each side understood the danger of using nuclear weapons. But the more nuclear powers appear on the political scene, the less chance there is of maintaining a stable world in a crisis situation: the existing nuclear stockpiles of the G5 countries - the UK, France, the US, China and Russia - will depreciate and the risk of a new "arms race" will increase.

- With each new player, more and more diplomatic efforts are required to pursue a policy of deterrence. The main danger becomes the threat of unauthorized use of nuclear weapons, especially as they may be at the mercy of radical religious groups. In this regard, reaching an agreement with Iran, which has been opposing de facto nuclear-armed Israel for decades, will, on the one hand, reduce the risks of nuclear escalation and, on the other hand, have a positive impact on the economy of both the region and the world.

In preparing the material, Izvestia spoke with and took into account the opinions of:

• political scientist Elena Suponina;
• Bogdan Bezpalko, member of the Presidential Council on Interethnic Relations;
• Adlan Margoev, analyst at the Institute of International Studies of the Moscow State Institute of International Relations;
• Leonid Tsukanov, orientalist, consultant of the Global and Regional Security: New Ideas for Russia program (PIR Center);
• Fyodor Lukyanov, editor-in-chief of the journal "Russia in Global Politics", chairman of the Presidium of the Council on Foreign and Defense Policy of Russia, director for scientific work of the Valdai International Discussion Club, research professor at the National Research University Higher School of Economics;
• Alisa Kazelko, expert of the Valdai International Discussion Club.