On November 18, 2024, Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei expressed the country’s hope that upcoming talks on its nuclear program would be conducted free from external political pressures. His remarks come ahead of a crucial meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) board of governors in Vienna, where Iran’s nuclear program will be a key topic of discussion. The tension surrounding the nuclear issue, especially in light of the deteriorating nuclear deal and the ongoing geopolitical standoff, underscores Iran’s desire for a more technical and less politicized approach to resolving the longstanding nuclear impasse.

Iran’s position is clear: it seeks to engage in discussions with the IAEA based on technical merits rather than the external political pressures that have historically been part of the broader diplomatic landscape. Baghaei emphasized that Iran’s goal in these talks is to allow the IAEA to conduct its technical assessments “away from the destructive and evil pressures of some parties,” a clear reference to the political influence exerted by Western powers, particularly the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany.

The timing of these statements is significant. They come just after IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi’s visit to Tehran, which took place on November 13, 2024. Grossi met with top Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, in an effort to ease tensions ahead of the IAEA’s board meeting. Iran has long held that its nuclear program is intended for peaceful purposes, a claim that has been met with skepticism and suspicion from Western countries, who fear that Tehran may be secretly seeking to develop nuclear weapons.

The road to the current diplomatic moment has been rocky and fraught with setbacks. The 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), marked a historic agreement between Iran and six major world powers: the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany. In exchange for lifting harsh international sanctions, Iran agreed to scale back its nuclear activities, including reducing its stockpile of enriched uranium and limiting the purity of uranium enrichment.

The deal was hailed as a significant achievement in non-proliferation efforts, securing Iran’s nuclear program for peaceful purposes while offering it much-needed relief from crippling sanctions. However, in May 2018, President Donald Trump’s administration unilaterally withdrew the United States from the agreement, citing Iran’s alleged non-compliance with the terms and the broader geopolitical threat it posed. This move led to the re-imposition of US sanctions and effectively collapsed the agreement. In retaliation, Iran began scaling back its compliance with the deal, increasing the level of uranium enrichment to 60 percent-well beyond the 3.67 percent limit set by the JCPOA and dangerously close to weapons-grade levels.

Despite the reintroduction of sanctions, Iran has maintained that its nuclear activities are purely for civilian purposes. However, the resumption of high-level uranium enrichment has raised alarm bells internationally, with critics claiming that the Iranian government is pursuing a path toward nuclear weapons capability. This tension has led to numerous rounds of negotiations and efforts to revive the JCPOA, but these talks have consistently faltered due to the complex geopolitical dynamics surrounding the issue.

IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi’s recent visit to Iran is seen as an important development in efforts to ease the diplomatic impasse. Grossi, who has previously been involved in several rounds of talks between Tehran and the IAEA, met with Iranian leaders to discuss the latest developments regarding the country’s nuclear program and to address any lingering doubts or concerns. The Iranian leadership, led by President Pezeshkian, conveyed a willingness to resolve ambiguities and doubts over Iran’s nuclear program, signaling a potential window of opportunity for dialogue.

Grossi’s visit was described by Iran as “beneficial and positive,” with Baghaei highlighting the “good understandings” that emerged from the talks. Iran has made it clear that it desires to resolve the nuclear issue in a way that prioritizes technical expertise and avoids the political manipulation that has often clouded the discussions. This technical approach, according to Tehran, would allow the IAEA to conduct its investigations and assessments based on scientific findings rather than political considerations.

Grossi’s visit, however, takes place against a backdrop of increasing pressure from the Western powers. The United Kingdom, Germany, and France, all signatories to the JCPOA, are expected to introduce a new resolution at the IAEA board meeting in Vienna, which will likely criticize Iran for its nuclear activities. This resolution is expected to further complicate the diplomatic landscape, especially as the US and its European allies continue to accuse Iran of flouting its international obligations.

Despite the tense situation, Iran’s top diplomat, Abbas Araghchi, has offered a glimmer of hope for renewed diplomatic efforts. On November 16, 2024, Araghchi stated that there was still an opportunity for diplomacy, though he characterized this opportunity as “limited.” His comments reflect a sense of urgency, signaling that while Tehran remains open to negotiations, it also faces the difficult reality that time may be running out for a meaningful resolution.

Araghchi’s statement also underscores Iran’s dual approach to its nuclear program—ready for both “confrontation” and “cooperation,” depending on how the other parties, particularly the US and its allies, choose to engage. Tehran’s position appears to be a balancing act: while it remains open to diplomacy, it is not afraid to take a harder stance if the diplomatic path does not yield positive results. This mixture of cooperation and confrontation has been a hallmark of Iran’s foreign policy in recent years, particularly as it grapples with sanctions, regional security issues, and its nuclear ambitions.

The limited opportunity for diplomacy that Araghchi references may also reflect the broader geopolitical shifts and the evolving nature of Iran’s relations with both regional and global powers. The recent US elections, the shifting dynamics in the Middle East, and the ongoing debates over the future of the nuclear deal all play a role in shaping Tehran’s approach to these negotiations.

As the IAEA board meeting approaches, it is clear that the situation remains delicate. The outcome of these talks will have profound implications not only for Iran’s nuclear program but also for the broader security landscape in the Middle East and the international community’s approach to non-proliferation. The path forward will likely depend on the willingness of both Iran and the West to set aside political agendas and engage in constructive, technical discussions aimed at resolving the nuclear impasse.

Whether diplomacy will succeed or whether the parties will be drawn into further confrontation remains uncertain. However, as Esmaeil Baghaei noted, Iran hopes that the IAEA can continue its work without being unduly influenced by political pressures, offering a glimmer of hope for a more technocratic and less politically charged resolution to the nuclear issue.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel