Counter circumstances: why the negotiation process on Iran has stalled
Negotiations between the United States and Iran to resolve the conflict have again been on the verge of collapse: Tehran links the return to dialogue with the lifting of the American blockade, while Washington insists on its own terms. The key contradictions between the warring parties remain, experts interviewed by Izvestia also note. On April 27, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic, Abbas Araqchi, will visit Russia, who, according to a number of media reports, may meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin. In these circumstances, the American side canceled a trip to Pakistan, where it was reported about a planned meeting with the Iranian delegation. Izvestia investigated why, despite Trump's assurances about the imminent end of the confrontation, the prospects for compromise are rapidly declining.
Iran links negotiations with the United States to lifting the blockade
US President Donald Trump said at the weekend that the conflict would "end very soon." At the same time, on the night of April 22, he announced the extension of the ceasefire until the Iranian side submits agreed proposals and a concrete result of the negotiations is achieved.
The diplomatic process, however, is not progressing. On April 25, the US president canceled the planned trip of Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner to Pakistan, where contacts on Iran were expected. "We do not intend to spend 15 hours on flights to get a document that is not good enough for us," Trump explained the cancellation of the visit. Earlier, information appeared about a possible meeting of the American and Iranian delegations in Islamabad, but these plans were never implemented.
US Special Envoys Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff
Iran, in turn, is demonstrating a strict link between returning to negotiations and meeting its own conditions. President Masoud Peseshkian, in a conversation with Pakistani Prime Minister Shahbaz Sharif, said that Tehran would not participate in peace talks under pressure, threats or attempts to block the Strait of Hormuz. The Iranian side insists that any negotiations are possible only if its "red lines" are respected and without external coercion.
At the same time, a cautious signal remains in diplomatic channels about the possibility of dialogue. According to Al-Monitor, the Iranian negotiators made it clear through intermediaries that softening the rhetoric from the US president could facilitate the resumption of contacts. It is reported that Tehran sent a signal through Pakistan that ending the threats from the American leader could strengthen the position of supporters of negotiations within the Iranian political system and reduce the influence of hardliners.
According to these data, if Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, after consultations with the mediators, considers that a deal with Washington remains possible, the parties could theoretically switch to new contacts in the coming days.
"The Iranian delegation presented to the Pakistani leadership a comprehensive vision on the issue of a cease—fire and a complete end to the war imposed on Iran," Al—Mayadeen correspondent Moussa Assi told Izvestia.
He added that the issue of the fate of the second round of negotiations with the American side was not raised. As for starting a settlement and returning to the negotiating table, it depends on the fate of the illegal American blockade imposed on Iranian ports.
However, according to Roman Yanushevsky, editor-in-chief of the Channel 9 website, at the moment the parties are not ready for a real compromise. In his opinion, the positions of the "hawks" inside Iran have strengthened, while more pragmatic circles have been pushed away from decision-making, which is reflected in Tehran's public rhetoric demonstrating rigidity and refusal to make concessions.
According to this logic, the situation around the Strait of Hormuz remains an important element of pressure on Tehran, Roman Yanushevsky believes. Although the threat of restrictions on shipping is seen as one of Iran's key levers, its effectiveness may decrease over time as global markets adapt and alternative energy supply routes are sought.
Araqchi to discuss settlement of Iran conflict in Russia
Araqchi himself has conducted a series of regional visits in recent days, including trips to Oman and Pakistan, and after Islamabad he will visit Russia. According to the ISNA news agency, Araqchi may hold a meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow as early as Monday. During the visit, consultations with the Russian leadership are planned, during which the parties will discuss the current state of the negotiation process and the latest developments in diplomatic efforts.
Meeting of Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi
It is known that in Muscat, Araqchi's meetings focused on the safety of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, a key energy route through which a significant part of the world's oil supplies pass. Iran insists on ending US restrictions on its ports as a precondition for the next round of negotiations.
A separate element of the discussions remains the idea of creating mechanisms for regulating transit through the strait, including possible fees from passing ships. According to media reports, these issues were discussed in Oman, which traditionally acts as an intermediary between Tehran and Washington.
At the same time, Moscow confirms its willingness to play a mediating role in the negotiations between the United States and Iran. Russia had previously proposed the option of transferring enriched uranium stocks to its territory, but this initiative did not receive support from the United States.
There are disturbing assessments across the Iranian political spectrum. Representatives of the conservative camp express concern about the direction of the negotiation process. For example, Mahmoud Nabavian, deputy head of the Iranian parliament's foreign policy and National Security commission, who participated in the first delegation to Islamabad, said that the negotiators had made a "strategic mistake" by allowing the nuclear issue to be discussed in a format that, in his opinion, paves the way for new demands from the United States.
A number of parliamentarians, including Amirhossein Sabeti, warn that the very fact of discussing the nuclear program is perceived by them as crossing a "red line". And Ali Hezrian, a member of the parliamentary committee on national security, went further in a television interview, saying that the supreme leadership does not support negotiations in the current conditions.
According to Roman Yanushevsky, the pause in hostilities is temporary and does not change the basic logic of the confrontation, which has not yet led to a stable diplomatic outcome.
"The resumption of war seems to be a likely scenario, since the current lull does not eliminate the key contradictions between the parties and does not form the basis for a long—term agreement," the expert told Izvestia.
According to Ilya Shcherbakov, an Oriental political scientist and member of the presidium of the Council of Young Political Scientists of the Russian Association of Political Science, it is premature to talk about a full-fledged diplomatic solution to the conflict at this stage. The situation around Iran is in an intermediate phase — between the "fog of war" and the partial deconfliction regime, when separate channels of interaction remain, but a stable political framework for a settlement has not yet been formed.
"The key issues that require consensus from all the warring parties (as part of a possible settlement of the conflict) are international trade through the Strait of Hormuz, Iran's nuclear program, as well as American-Israeli ambitions in the region," Ilya Shcherbakov believes.
Under these conditions, regional instability persists, including around Lebanon, where the situation continues to be a factor of additional pressure on diplomatic processes. Despite attempts by international mediators to consolidate the ceasefire between Israel and the Hezbollah movement, the parties continue to exchange blows.
In early April, Israel and Lebanon held direct talks in Washington for the first time in decades, mediated by the United States, and agreed on a short-term truce, which was then extended until May 17. However, it remains extremely fragile. The Israeli authorities accuse Hezbollah of violating the ceasefire and declare continued attacks on targets in Lebanon.
On the night of April 26, Israeli aircraft launched massive strikes on the southern regions of Lebanon, which are traditionally considered strongholds of the Shiite movement. The attacks followed an order by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to launch "powerful strikes" on Hezbollah's infrastructure. In response, the movement used drones against Israeli positions in the south of the country.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
