The American National Interest magazine published a joint article by Iranian diplomat Syed Hossein Mousavian, former spokesman for the Iranian negotiating team, and Abi al-Qasim Baynat, a researcher in nuclear security affairs at Harvard University, urging the need for the United States and Iran to seek a settlement that keeps their political dispute within limits Manage it.

The two writers believe that at a time when diplomats are maneuvering to find ways to revive the nuclear deal with Iran, the biggest question on the minds of political decision makers is how to prevent that agreement after its revival or any other similar agreement with Tehran from facing a fate similar to what happened during the president’s era. Former American Donald Trump, ensuring its sustainability.

where is the error?

The article indicates that by returning to the record of implementing the nuclear agreement with Iran during the past five years, it becomes clear that the main threat to any nuclear agreement with Tehran comes from Washington's desire to preserve most of its economic influence over Iran, and to reduce Tehran's benefit from the lifting of sanctions imposed on it. This is because the main dispute between the United States and Iran revolves around the region, not just over the Iranian nuclear program.

Fear that Washington will backtrack on the agreement, along with Tehran's security motives, motivates Iran to refrain from making irreversible commitments, and preserving a large part of its nuclear capabilities as a means of pressure on Washington.

The authors argue that the asymmetry in the possibility of rolling back from the commitments between Washington and Tehran, the relative ease and speed with which America may re-impose its sanctions on Iran, as well as the hardship and long duration of Iran's rebuilding of its nuclear infrastructure and low-enriched uranium reserves, are all factors that reinforce the makers' concerns. Political decision in Iran.

The US withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran has validated Tehran's concerns, and exacerbated an atmosphere of mutual mistrust between the two countries.

De-escalation

The authors believe that the way to salvage the Iranian nuclear deal in the long term is to rebuild relations between Iran and the United States, and to reach a settlement that satisfies both parties.

They explain that getting out of this impasse will not be possible without abandoning the current useless mentality in which relations between Iran and the United States are managed, and that Washington and Tehran must recognize that their intractable struggle over the past four decades has not led to a victory for either of them, but rather caused Losses for both countries.

The article indicates that reaching a settlement that satisfies the two parties will not be easy to achieve overnight by two governments that have consistently tarnished each other's image over the past four decades, but Tehran and Washington can reduce the escalation by undertaking mutual confidence-building measures and initiatives that reflect good Intention, including easing their inflammatory rhetoric and accusation.

The authors conclude that de-escalation and building relations between Tehran and Washington must begin by reviving the nuclear agreement, implementing its provisions, and achieving economic cooperation within the terms of that agreement.