December 13-2013
Foreign Minister Mohammad-Javad Zarif says the nuclear deal will be dead if the US Congress passes any new sanctions bill, even one that wouldn’t take effect unless the nuclear talks collapsed.
Momentum has been building in Congress for just such legislation. It remains to be seen if Zarif’s remarks will halt that momentum or act like a red banner in front of a bull, encouraging even more legislators to support such a bill to prove they won’t be pushed around by the Islamic Republic.
One former congressional staffer said, “Zarif isn’t showing what an expert he is on the United States, but how little he understands it. Only a rare member of Congress will now want to oppose the legislation because they know their opponents will start running 30-second TV spots saying they have folded in the face of Zarif’s challenge—and that would be the kiss of death.”
On the other hand, Zarif’s remarks had not gotten much media attention in the United States before the Iran Times went to press. It is possible the comments will just blow over and not have any impact.
Zarif spoke out in an interview with Time magazine that was conducted Saturday and posted online Monday.
Zarif was asked, “What happens if Congress imposes new sanctions, even if they don’t go into effect for six months?”
Without a pause, Zarif said, “The entire deal is dead.”
He then went on to explain his position in detail. Here is his full reply: “We do not like to negotiate under duress. And if Congress adopts sanctions, it shows lack of seriousness and lack of a desire to achieve a resolution on the part of the United States. I know the domestic complications and various issues inside the United States, but for me that is no justification. I have a parliament. My parliament can also adopt various legislation that can go into effect if negotiations fail. But if we start doing that, I don’t think that we will be getting anywhere. Now we have tried to ask our members of parliament to avoid that. We may not succeed. The US government may not succeed. If we don’t try, then we can’t expect the other side to accept that we are serious about the process.”
Strangely, Zarif did not grant that President Obama has not just tried, but has very loudly opposed the legislation and argued that the proposed sanctions bill could stop the talks with Iran and lead to war.
Zarif was asked what he saw as the problem areas in the upcoming talks for a permanent agreement. He cited only one—the Arak heavy water reactor. “It is our intention that it will remain exclusively peaceful, but how we give them the necessary assurances … may be one of the more difficult areas.”
That is likely to be true, given that Obama last week said he wanted the Arak plant shut down completely. He also said he wanted the Fordo uranium enrichment plant closed, though he would allow the Natanz enrichment plant to continue operating.
Time asked Zarif why Iran needs the Arak plant at all. He said, “Because we need to produce radio isotopes for medical purposes.” Iran has been producing medical isotopes for decades at its Tehran reactor.
Time queried Zarif on the opposition to the nuclear deal within Iran and Zarif described the same kind of opposition that Obama faces in the United States—lack of trust in the other interlocutor.
Zarif said, “The most opposition here emanates from the lack of trust because we do not have a past on which we can build. It’s a psychological barrier to interaction that we need to overcome. The fundamental reason for opposition: they [Iranian critics] believe the West and particularly the United States are not sincere, are not interested about reaching an agreement. They believe that they will try to use the mechanism of negotiations in order to derail the process, in order to find new excuses.”
A new American poll shows a majority of the American public does not trust the Islamic Republic and does not believe it is serious about the nuclear talks. (See article on top of this page.)
Zarif also complained that American politicians making critical and unhelpful comments have not helped to foster the atmosphere in Iran needed for the talks to advance. He did not, however, suggest that unhelpful comments being made in Iran might have the same negative impact on the atmosphere in the United States.
Zarif said, “In terms of using these talks to foster confidence, I don’t think we have been very successful in that process—because the talks have been followed by public statements that have not differed that significantly from statements that used to be made before the talks. Basically, in this day and age, you don’t have secret negotiations, everything is done out in the open. You cannot pick and choose your audience. And that is one of the beauties of globalization and one of the hazards of globalization, whichever way you want to say it. When Secretary [of State John] Kerry talks to the US Congress, the most conservative constituencies in Iran also hear him and interpret his remarks. So it’s important for everyone to be careful what they say to their constituencies because others are listening and others are drawing their own conclusions.”
That remark and his comment about new US sanctions legislation—even if it doesn’t take effect for six months—killing the deal may come back to haunt Zarif.
Meanwhile, Rep. Eric Cantor of Virginia, the Republican majority leader of the House of Representatives, announced that he will introduce a resolution calling for more sanctions on Iran and insisting that the next agreement require that all uranium enrichment by Iran be stopped permanently. Obama has already said that while that is a desirable result, it is not a reasonable outcome and he won’t pursue it.
The Cantor resolution is expected to pass easily since the GOP has a majority in the House. The open question is how many Democrats will support it. Since it is a resolution and is not binding on Obama, many Democrats may support it to cover themselves back home.
There is an even greater concern about Democrats in the Senate, where they are a majority. Most have been noticeably silent about the new nuclear deal. The Friends Committee of National Legislation checked with all 53 Democrats and found that none are opposing the deal with Iran but a mere 12—not even a quarter of the membership—have spoken out in support of the agreement. The silence of the others is deafening.
