- Статьи
- World
- Stand up for detente: The UN Security Council may become a guarantor of the nuclear deal with Tehran
Stand up for detente: The UN Security Council may become a guarantor of the nuclear deal with Tehran
There are prerequisites for the emergence of a new agreement on the nuclear deal to replace the JCPOA, despite the remaining disagreements. At the same time, a potential document on the Iranian program may be supported by international guarantees, including through the UN Security Council. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia's permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, told Izvestia about this. According to him, the current situation does not suit either side. But the negotiation process remains extremely difficult: Washington is putting pressure on Tehran, and regional instability — from the situation around the Strait of Hormuz to tensions in Lebanon — further complicates the prospects for peace between the United States and Iran.
Rosatom is set to continue the Bushehr NPP project
A future agreement on the Iranian nuclear program may provide for a mechanism of guarantees. Mikhail Ulyanov, Russia's permanent representative to the international organizations in Vienna, told Izvestia about this. According to him, there are prerequisites for new agreements. The diplomat noted that one of the possible formats of guarantees could be a UN Security Council resolution. In this case, Russia would most likely support a corresponding document that could replace the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), an international agreement on the Iranian nuclear program signed in 2015 by Iran and a group of countries with the participation of Russia, the United States, China and European states.
— Russia can be called a guarantor of the JCPOA only conditionally. Formally, she was a participant, one of the parties to the nuclear deal. Are there any prerequisites for a new agreement? Of course, there is, because no one is satisfied with the current state of affairs. Unresolved issues require a negotiated settlement," Mikhail Ulyanov told Izvestia.
The JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) is an international agreement on the Iranian nuclear program signed in 2015 by Iran and a group of countries (the United States, Russia, China, Great Britain, France, Germany with the participation of the EU). The essence of the deal was to limit Iran's nuclear program — primarily uranium enrichment and infrastructure development — in exchange for the lifting of international sanctions. The deal provided for enhanced IAEA control over Iran's nuclear facilities and mechanisms for verifying compliance with obligations. In 2018, the United States withdrew from the agreement and restored sanctions against Iran, after which Tehran began to gradually reduce its obligations under the JCPOA.
Mikhail Ulyanov noted that the very question of the possible institution of guarantors of the future agreement remains open and will depend on its specific content.
— If, for example, the UN Security Council resolution turns out to be the guarantor, then we are highly likely to support such a resolution. But first, of course, it will be necessary to get acquainted with the final text of the agreements," the diplomat said.
Meanwhile, the issue of ensuring the safety of nuclear infrastructure remains without practical progress. According to Ulyanov, there is currently no substantive discussion of additional mechanisms for protecting nuclear facilities at the IAEA and the UN.
According to him, recent events in various regions have shown that the international community does not yet have sufficient political will to develop universal mechanisms to protect such facilities and prevent attacks on them.
— As for the return of Russian personnel to the Bushehr NPP, this will happen as soon as possible after the military situation allows it. In any case, Rosatom State Corporation is firmly committed to continuing the implementation of this project," Mikhail Ulyanov said.
According to the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, on March 17, a shell fired during the operations of the United States or Israel hit the territory of the industrial site of a nuclear power plant near an operating power unit, while, according to the head of Rosatom, Alexei Likhachev, there were no casualties or damage. Later, on March 24, another impact was recorded near the Bushehr NPP, also without consequences for the plant. Against this background, Russia has completed the evacuation of most of the specialists from the facility, leaving about 20 people to monitor the equipment.
Negotiations around Iran
In these circumstances, the diplomatic process around the Iranian nuclear program is difficult. According to American media reports, Washington is discussing scenarios for increasing pressure on Tehran, including long-term economic restrictions and measures aimed at limiting oil exports and shipping. Such steps are seen as an attempt to force Iran to make concessions on a key issue — the future of its nuclear program.
It is reported that during internal discussions at the White House, US President Donald Trump opted for continued pressure, considering military escalation and direct intervention as less preferable options. The American administration believes that economic deterrence may turn out to be a more manageable tool than a resumption of strikes or a complete withdrawal from the negotiation process.
At the same time, diplomatic activity remains unstable. In particular, previously planned contacts between American representatives and intermediaries in Pakistan were canceled. According to media reports, Washington is expressing doubts about Tehran's willingness to compromise at the current stage.
Roman Yanushevsky, editor-in-chief of the Israeli Channel 9 website, told Izvestia that he did not consider it possible for Iran to abandon key elements of its current strategy, including its nuclear program, missile development, and support for allied armed groups. At the same time, it is Washington's harsh demands and attempts to impose unilateral conditions that significantly complicate the prospects for a sustainable political settlement. The ongoing uncertainty surrounding the negotiation process is not so much related to Iran's position, but rather to the lack of readiness of the United States for an equal dialogue, which increases the risks of further escalation.
An additional political factor is related to internal restrictions in the United States. According to Time magazine, American lawmakers from the Democratic Party are considering legal action against President Donald Trump if the military operation against Iran continues after May 1 without congressional approval. By this date, a 60-day period expires from the moment lawmakers are notified of the start of the operation, after which the White House must either secure their approval or officially justify the need for an additional 30-day period for the withdrawal of troops.
Iran's Three-step Plan
At the same time, various possible settlement formats are being discussed. Among them is a three—stage plan proposed by the Iranian side. He suggests that a cessation of hostilities and security guarantees should be ensured first, then regional issues, including the situation around the Strait of Hormuz, can be discussed, and only after that, a return to the nuclear dossier. Tehran insists that it is impossible to discuss the nuclear program without fulfilling the first two conditions.
However, in the United States, such a sequence is viewed critically. In American political circles, they believe that this approach postpones the resolution of a key issue and does not actually create guarantees for limiting Iranian nuclear activities.
Iran, in turn, is demonstrating a tough stance, linking a return to negotiations with an end to pressure and respect for its "red lines." The country's leadership emphasizes that it is not ready to discuss the nuclear program in the face of threats or external coercion.
Regional tensions also persist in this situation, which directly affects diplomatic efforts around the Iranian issue. In particular, the situation around Lebanon turned out to be an additional factor of pressure on the negotiation process. Despite attempts by international mediators to consolidate the ceasefire between Israel and the Hezbollah movement, the parties intensified the exchange of 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 subsequently extended until May 16. But it is extremely fragile: the Israeli authorities accuse Hezbollah of violations and declare the continuation of attacks on its facilities in Lebanon, which further reduces the chances of stable agreements on the Iranian direction.
Переведено сервисом «Яндекс Переводчик»
