White House Denies Report On Interim Deal With Iran

Principal deputy spokesperson Vedant Patel in response to a question about a Haaretz report saying talks have made progress said, “I’m certainly not going to respond to rumors or leaks of diplomatic conversations, which of course have a tendency to be false and misleading.”

In recent weeks the State Department has used the same exact formulation to characterize many media reports about some sort of indirect negotiations with Tehran, whether on the nuclear issue or securing the release of American hostages.

Haaretz reported Wednesday that Israel believes secret talks are taking place possibly to reach a limited or partial deal, whereby Iran would reduce the level of its uranium enrichment in exchange for the release of around $20 billion of its funds frozen in Iraq, South Korea and its share of withdrawal from the International Monetary Fund.

100%

The chief of Iran’s central bank was visiting the IMF in Washington last week and Iranian media quoted him as saying that Tehran could withdraw around $6 billion of its contributions.

If true, $20 billion seems like a big amount, but in reality, it will help the Islamic Republic for a few months amid its economic crisis and is not a fundamental solution to its domestic instability.

However, already the battered Iranian currency, the rial, has begun to rise in the Tehran foreign currency market, possibly driven by anticipation of a diplomatic breakthrough. The US dollar fell below 500,000 rials late on Wednesday for the first time since March 28. It has risen by more than 10 percent in recent weeks.

Spokesperson Patel also repeated the same public policy formulations that the Biden administration has been using on the Iran topic - the US will not allow Iran to gain nuclear weapons, but it believes the best way to achieve that goal is through diplomacy.

However, Israel strongly opposes any partial deal with Iran that does not fundamentally remove the danger of Iran building nuclear weapons. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu once again warned on June 4 that Israel is preparing for a multi-front conflict if it decides to attack Iran’s nuclear installations.

“The latest statements are probably a response to an American effort to reach some sort of an agreement with Iran,” Maj, Gen. Yaakov Amidror, senior fellow at the Jerusalem Institute for Strategy and Security and former national security adviser to Netanyahu, was quoted as saying this week.

“The Israeli statements are also aimed at Iranian ears, that should they cross a certain line, Israel will respond, and does not see itself committed to any international agreements reached with Iran,” he added.

Iranian officials have repeatedly claimed in recent months that indirect contacts with Washington continue to rekindle nuclear talks that were suspended last September after 18 months of unfruitful diplomacy. The Biden administration long denied any talks, even calling Iranian officials liars at one point. But media hints about a partial deal being discussed have surfaced since February.

Tehran’s release of three Western hostages last week, and lack of a Western attempt to table a resolution against Iran this week at the board meeting of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, could be signs of secret dealings.

On Wednesday, the E3 as well as the United States submitted separate statements to the International Atomic Energy Agency's board of governors over the Islamic Republic’s implementation of its obligations under its NPT Safeguards Agreement, noting that the answers that Tehran provided over the cases of uranium traces are not technically credible.

However, diplomats told Iran International’s Vienna correspondent that no resolution or even any specific statement to censure Iran’s activities and lack of cooperation is expected by the IAEA board of governors.

The E3 said Iran’s activities such as centrifuge configuration changes at Fordow without prior notice to the IAEA and detection of particles of uranium enriched at 83.7% took place in the context of over four years of a lack of substantive cooperation with the IAEA regarding possible undeclared nuclear material three undeclared locations in Iran two decades ago.

100%

Referring to the three earlier resolutions by the IAEA board against Iran, the latest in November, the E3 said that the IAEA decided it is “essential and urgent” that Iran act to fulfil its legal obligations and clarify all outstanding safeguards issues without delay. "Iran’s longstanding lack of cooperation with the Agency, incremental and limited steps are neither sufficient nor satisfactory,” read the statement.

Calling on the IAEA to continue to demand full transparency from Iran on all outstanding safeguards issues, the E3 wondered why the agency’s assessment of the issues remains the same but the agency has no additional questions on the depleted uranium particles.

Agency’s assessment of Iran's activities was that it conducted explosive experiments at the Marivan site. This assessment has not changed yet.

The US said in its statement that “The Agency now says it has no further questions related to two of the four sites at this stage, but this does not constitute 'closure' of these files, as some have inaccurately claimed.”

The European states also expressed great concern that the agency reports no progress towards resolving the remaining outstanding safeguards issues pertaining to Turquzabad and Varamin sites.

“Unless and until Iran provides technically credible explanations to the Agency’s persisting outstanding questions, as reiterated by the November Resolution, the Agency will not be able to confirm the correctness and completeness of Iran’s declarations under its NPT Safeguards Agreement,” E3 added.

They went on to point out other issues such as limited steps towards reinstallation of enrichment monitoring devices at both Fordow and Natanz.

Echoing the same concerns, the US also said “Regrettably, Iran’s level of cooperation to date has fallen short.” “The absence of this assurance remains deeply concerning, especially considering more recent safeguards implementation issues in Iran,” it added.

The fact that despite all the open cases the IAEA board of governors did not issue any resolution against the Islamic Republic may be a sign that the regime is about to finalize a nuclear deal with the US behind the scenes.

During the past few weeks, reports have surfaced that Tehran and Washington have been in close – yet indirect – contact with each other to reach an interim agreement.

Earlier in the day, Haaretz reported that Israel expects an interim agreement to be reached within a few weeks, expected to include an Iranian agreement to stop uranium enrichment at high levels in return for releasing Iran's frozen funds.

After all, it was the US and the E3 that spearheaded past IAEA resolutions, and this time as in March, they sufficed by issuing statements.

Mehrzad Boroujerdi, vice provost and dean of College of Arts, Sciences and Education at Missouri University, told Iran International that considering the increasing communication between Tehran and Washington and the developments at the IAEA board meeting, the Haaretz’s report can be true.

In an opinion article in the Wall Street Journal Wednesday, Bolton sharply rebuked Biden for pursuing the revival of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal, lax sanctions enforcement against Tehran, and his “apparent disdain for key Middle East allies.” He argued that Iran is overcoming a US policy of containment and Arab regional states, having lost confidence, are open to overtures by China and Russia.

Bolton also accused the administration of opposing an Israeli last resort attack on Iran’s nuclear installations to prevent the possible production of nuclear weapons, and in fact trying to prevent it.

He urged Biden to plan for a regime change in Iran, instead of making a deal that would release billions of dollars to the clerical regime. The former UN ambassador and national security advisor has long advocated that the only way to neutralize the threat posed by Iran is to change its anti-West regime.

At the same time, the Israeli Haaretz newspaper claimed that “major progress” has been achieved in contacts between Washington and Tehran for what appears to be an “interim deal”. In exchange for release of around $20 billion in frozen funds abroad, Iran would stop high-level uranium enrichment, the paper said.

The United States has been demanding that Iran stop its close military collaboration with Russia as a pre-condition for resuming the JCPOA talks. It is not clear that this would be part of an interim and limited agreement. Iran, which supplies weapons to Russia for its war in Ukraine, can use any released funds to accelerate its weapons production.

The low-key daily's report would have not been noticed much if was not re-printed by Tehran's leading economic daily Donya-ye Eqtesad, which opined that Tehran is likely to accept new terms in the nuclear agreement to which the United States and Iran are the most important parties.

A change in the JCPOA has been suggested by the United States as its precondition for returning to the talks with Iran over its controversial nuclear program. The United States demands some regional defense and security issues to be included in the new agreement nicknamed by the media as JCPOA Plus.

After 18 months of talks to revive the JCPOA came to a halt in September, the Biden administration has been saying it is no longer focused on the issue and has numerated a few conditions Iran must meet.

According to Khorasan, these issues include Iran's cooperation with Russia in the war against Ukraine. However, the daily noted that there are still no signs to indicate that the United States is willing to return to talks as both US Democrats and Republicans see Iran as "a dangerous country that should come under control, and the United States should make sure to prevent Tehran's access to nuclear weapons.

100%

Nonetheless, Khorasan wrote that the Americans have said repeatedly an agreement with Iran is feasible. This comes while Iran has insisted it is willing to return to the 2015 agreement without any changes. The daily, however, added, presumably based on its access to insider information, that Iran is now prepared to accept some changes in the JCPOA if Washington offers guarantees about its commitment to the new agreement.

Khorasan added that regardless of Tehran's readiness to enter a new agreement, the two countries have big differences over non-nuclear issues the United States wishes to include in the document.

Meanwhile, Entekhab news website, which is close to Iran's moderates and the members of Iran's previous administration, quoted former diplomat Javid Ghorbanoghlou as saying that the government of President Ebrahim Raisi has missed the opportunity to revive the JCPOA because of its illogical slogans.

Ghorbanoghlou said that the hardliner members of the Raisi administration previously branded the JCPOA as a "disgrace" but now they wish to revive the same agreement. He added that currently, the United States is not interested in reviving the JCPOA and negotiating with Iran is not among its priorities.

He explained that recent contacts between the US and Iranian officials with the mediation of top Omani officials were merely meant to secure the release of US prisoners [meaning hostages] in Iran, an issue which has key significance for President Joe Biden ahead of the US elections.

Ghorbanoghlou said: Biden needs a victory in foreign policy following the fiasco in Afghanistan and the strategic surprises in Ukraine. Under the circumstances, releasing the prisoners has become a priority for Biden particularly after Belgium and other countries managed to get their imprisoned nationals out of Iran in recent weeks.

The former diplomat said although US efforts have not been successful so far, he is confident some of the US prisoners in Iran will be released soon as mediations are likely to become fruitful.

Zarif was guest in a five-hour discussion session in Persian on the social media audio app, Club House, and around 40,000 people listened in.

The former foreign minister has long been a favorite target of Iran’s hardliners as the supposed architect of the 2015 JCPOA nuclear deal and allegedly as a man pre-disposed to forge better ties with the United States and Europe. But in recent days these attacks intensified as Zarif began to tweet after a long silence.

Zarif without mentioning a name said, “A senator close to Trump came to see me in New York and said Trump had invited me to the White House. I relayed this message to Tehran and said if I fail [in resolving differences] I will accept punishment, but the message did not reach higher echelons and was rejected at lower levels.”

Although Zarif did not mention when this incident took place, media reports during his visits to New York show that it was most likely in the first half of 2019,or a year after Trump withdrew from the JCPOA.

However, his claim that his message was not relayed to top decision makers leaves question marks. The nuclear dispute with the United States, crippling sanctions the Trump administration imposed and the danger of a military confrontation at the time, made a meeting with Trump a crucial development for Tehran and such a message would have certainly been delivered to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, the ultimate decision maker.

100%

Zarif’s claim that lower-level people prevented him from meeting Trump, might be a tactic to protect Khamenei, whom many Iranians blame for the costly confrontation with the United States.

In fact, Zarif himself admitted during the discussion that “all reports were being relayed to Khamenei, and he expressed his opinion whenever he wanted…”

Zarif also spoke at length about his diplomatic efforts, trying to enlist the help of French President Emmanuel Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin to make an opening with the Trump administration.

Zarif claimed that Macron told him in Paris that Trump was ready to meet with him, but “I did not have permission to meet with Trump.”

“In contrast to Trump, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was a person, who driven by his ideology spoiled everything related to the JCPOA. The triangle of Benjamin Netanyahu, Mike Pompeo and [former national security adviser] John Bolton” did everything to prevent a meeting with Trump.

This statement somewhat contradicted Zarif’s earlier assertion that he was not allowed by Tehran to meet with Trump.

“I asked Vladimir Putin to directly relay Iran’s plan for the JCPOA to Trump, without [Secretary of State] Pompeo’s intervention, but Pompeo realized this and prevented it.”

Zarif speaking about Iran’s inability to pressure the US said, “Iran can pressure Europe but due to American economic clout the Europeans acted in a weak manner regarding Iran, but they helped the Islamic Republic to obtain management posts in the United Nations.”

The former foreign minister was referring to European banks and companies generally abiding by US sanctions and adding to the economic pressure on the Islamic Republic. However, he did not mention any details about the posts he claimed Europeans helped secure at the UN.

Regarding the JCPOA negotiations from 2013-2015, Zarif said, “We wanted to break the security consensus formed against Iran and for this reason we negotiated. Removing [international] sanctions was not our only goal.”

Zarif’s appearance and statements in the Club House discussion are bound to reverberate in Iran and lead to strong attacks by hardliners. It is not clear why he chose to speak now and to what extent this is a part of an orchestrated effort by top decision makers, who are facing similar international isolation and security threats as a decade ago.