The Dynamics of US-Iran Talks: Prospects of a Peace Agreement

Outcome of the War (so far). By now we are amply clear that three countries were fully involved in fighting this war: the United States, Israel and Iran; a few countries were passively involved, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Qatar, Bahrain, to an extent, Kuwait and Oman. Now all these countries actively or indirectly part of the conflict had varying objectives. And this fact affected the outcome of the war and is now profoundly impacting the peace talks and, resultantly, expected terms of agreement, if it happens at all. This paper will not delve into the nature and character of this war or discuss its asymmetries, war objectives, who lost and who won, etc. There can be a different write-up on all these issues whenever the conflict is over. 

The importance of First Round of Talks and Role of Pakistan.  While Iran was agreeing to most of the US demands during their parleys in Oman, Israel and America treacherously attacked Iran, violating all international laws and conventions. Opening with the unethical and immoral decapitating strikes, killing their highest spiritual leader and many other important commanders in their very first wave, the US soon realised that they had stepped into some quagmire, and in spite of combined bombing by US and Israeli air powers, employing the latest guided and lethal arsenal, they could not break the WILL of the Iranian nation. There were no street protests against the Iranian regime; rather, the nation got galvanised and vowed to avenge the death of Ayatullah Ali Khamenei, their spiritual leader. Iran instead of getting subdued, 

started hitting back, initially employing rudimentary drones and missiles to saturate the enemy air defence systems. After the initial intense launching of decoys and low-tech drones and missiles, Iran started expanding the war zone by hitting all American bases in the Middle East while severely punishing Israel with modern precision-guided missiles. This unexpected reaction surprised the friends and the foes. 

At this important juncture, Pakistan’s Deputy PM / FM Ishaq Dar visited China, and the communique issued clearly indicated the Chinese stance opposing the attack by US-Israeli forces and supported the right of Iran’s self-defense. That was the first major change in the situation. Pakistan’s ability to simultaneously open communication channels with the US and China on one hand, and Arabs and Iranians on the other hand, proved handy, and the world’s attention focused on Pakistan’s efforts asking the warring nations for a ceasefire. Pakistan enjoyed the full support of Chinese brothers in this arduous task. To bring a Super Power (US), a rogue state (Israel) and a highly resilient nation (Iran) to the table was not an easy task. However, Pakistan succeeded in doing that, and it became a historic moment. A ceasefire after intense fighting (though asymmetrical) of forty days was a crown for which the entire world showered praises on Pakistan’s military and political leadership.

Why the Table-talks facing So Many Snags and Hitches ?  Deep-rooted animosity and bitterness between Iran and the US-Israel duo spanning five decades could not be overcome in one sitting. However, the fragile ceasefire still holds notwithstanding the threatening tones and actions of both sides. To understand the state of minds of the various warring and the affected nations , we need to analyze what each entity must be considering.

President Trump. Isolated and getting unpopular (if ‘No King’ protests are any indicator) with each passing day, he must be feeling the heat of his decision to support Israel’s interests more than the US interests in the Middle East. European Union and NATO countries are not supporting his decisions; rather, most of them totally oppose this great gamble that, in any case, he has lost. Afraid of his possible impeachment, which certain political quarters are demanding, he is also apprehensive of the Vice President’s rising popularity because J.D. Vance is the one who could replace Trump in case the latter is forced to step down. Vance is also known to be a critic of initiating this war. Some analysts also suspect that the calling back of J.D. Vance from Islamabad in haste, as the talks were showing some prospects of an initial breakthrough, is attributable to the fear of J.D. Vance’s popularity. Thus, Trump is looking for some face-saving twist in the ground situation that can enable him to come to the negotiating table with some grace.

Israel and Netanyahu: Iran and its proxies are a physical impediment in the way to the manifestation of ‘Greater Israel’. Israel was expecting the collapse of the present Iranian regime and replacing it with an amenable political and military hierarchy, but that did not happen. Also, Israel was busy capturing Lebanon’s territory to annex it as part of Israel. They have succeeded in mostly doing that. Thus, the initial delay in accepting the ceasefire can now be explained.

For Netanyahu it would be a stalemate if they continue fighting, but the moment the dust of war settles down, he might face some grave problems in domestic politics. So, Israel may accept an immediate ceasefire, just to recoup and refresh, without any long-term settlement that may help Iran.

Iran And The Present Regime. The late Ali Khamenei enjoyed a lot of respect not only in Iran but also across other Shiite Muslims elsewhere. But the last riots (instigated and abetted by the CIA and MOSSAD) all across Iran, prior to the war, shook the present regime. People took to the streets due to economic difficulties mainly because of international and American sanctions. The harsh laws on some other aspects could also be a contributing factor. This small insurrection was put down ruthlessly but successfully. And as the Iranian negotiators had nearly accepted very low or no enrichment of uranium (which would have been an unpopular decision), came the US-Israel attack that galvanised the Iranian nation under the banner of the present government, especially after the martyrdom of Khamenei.

So the IRGC and present government, after successfully fighting back gallantly in a highly asymmetric environment, can never show any weakness on the table of negotiations. That would be a death knell for this regime, hence their unwavering resolve and denial to negotiate under threats and violations of the ceasefire.

Arab States. There is a clear split within countries of the Middle East regarding the end state of this war. Few are still closely bonded with American and Israeli objectives, as they are weary of a resurgent Iran and its influence in the region. There are other Arab countries with a better understanding of emerging multipolarity, and they wish to break away from the US orbit. Also, the new alliances forging between Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Pakistan, Türkiye, Egypt, etc., encouraged by China and maybe Russia, are a sign of their understanding the new geopolitical realities. The present blockade of the Straits of Hormuz and stalemate in the peace process are hurting their economies. So most major powers in ME would support the peace process.