As negotiations on the nuclear deal between Iran and the United States were reportedly near the finish line, Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) did not hesitate to launch a 12-missile strike on Erbil in Iraqi Kurdistan, against what they described as an “Israeli target”, but close to the US consulate. A few days later, another salvo was launched against Saudi Aramco facilities in Jeddah, on the kingdom’s Red Sea coast, while the fifth round of Saudi-Iranian talks in Baghdad was suspended.
Tehran has also been insisting that Washington remove the (IRGC) from its Foreign Terrorist Organisations list. Such move could help the military arm of the Iranian Revolution to expand its operations and increases its political power and regional influence.
The Islamic Republic has made no effort to convince anybody that it is going to change its destabilising attitudes towards its neighbours, raising questions about this desire of the Biden administration to revive the nuclear deal without sufficient guarantees to calm the fears of regional stakeholders.
The tendency of the US to reach any deal, at almost any cost, encouraged Tehran to cling to tough and uncompromising positions from day one. After the escalation of tensions between the West and Russia over Ukraine, the Biden administration would hasten to close the Iran file and focus on the challenges from Russia and China. Meanwhile, European partners feel more encouraged than ever to close this deal in the hope that Iranian oil supplies could ease the situation in oil markets, where prices hit record highs amid fears of cutting the Russian supplies.
Strengthening sanctions during negotiations or following a failure to conclude an agreement would cause an even more severe shortage in the market and prices would rise even faster, aggravating inflation.
However, this will not work in favour of European countries, which are struggling to find alternatives to Russian energy supplies.
This is an idea that Iran was keen to perpetuate with promises of millions of tons of oil stored in tankers, which could be dispatched to customers at short notice, while preparations are already underway to ramp up production that could reach 3.7 million barrels a day by next year.
However, going into an accelerated deal cannot put the brakes on Iran’s dangerous ambitions, leading to unwanted consequences that may outweigh any short-term gains.
Acquiescence to Iranian demands while ignoring security guarantees will produce a deal that will neither prevent Iran from eventually developing nuclear weapons, nor dissuade the IRGC from conducting further terror attacks.
It is also dangerous to separate the nuclear deal with Iran from Tehran’s missile programme and “destabilising” activities across the region, namely its support for armed non-state actors like Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Houthis in Yemen.
Any deal should guarantee that Iran will not use any benefits derived from sanctions lifting as part of a nuclear agreement to fuel these other activities which eventually could endanger the world’s economic and political stability.
Discussion about this post