A senior State Department official described the latest status of the talks in Vienna at a briefing.
According to ISNA, the details of this conversation are as follows:
Please describe the latest status of the talks, the most important developments and the challenges ahead.
Well, first of all, it should be noted that this was the first round of talks held by the new government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, and considering the unresolved deadlocks in the sixth round, it was already clear that in this round of talks The final result was reached. However, the government was of the opinion that the negotiating team should be present in Vienna during this round of talks, both in terms of expertise and composition, as well as in terms of texts and suggestions, because first of all, the negotiating team was sent on a mission to achieve A good deal had been reached in Vienna, and secondly, it was anticipated that some opposing parties might accuse the Islamic Republic of Iran of lack of seriousness and lack of clear proposals during this round of talks. The new government entered the talks with a pragmatic approach and a clear plan, and before the delegation’s visit to Vienna, Iran’s proposals were finalized and ready to be presented to the other side.
It is necessary to emphasize that the proposed text of Iran is based on the draft of the previous 6 rounds and the same text is the basis and the amendments and proposals proposed by Iran are specified and presented on the text. These proposals are naturally not maximal because they are presented in full compliance with Borjam, but unfortunately the other side’s approach to its obligations is minimal.
In the same context, on the third day of the talks, the Islamic Republic delegation presented two draft texts outlining Iran’s proposals and reforms, one on the lifting of sanctions and the other on nuclear issues.
My guess is that especially the European parties, as well as the United States, which is in constant contact with these three countries, did not expect that Iran at this stage with a full text that is in compliance with UN Security Council Resolution 2231 and Preserve the common principles of the dialogue of previous eras and enter into negotiations. That is why the other side, since receiving these drafts, has raised the issue of stopping the dialogue and returning to the capitals for consultation.
Although the Iranian delegation’s negotiating approach was necessary from the first day, it was interactive and flexible, but unfortunately, in front of the three European countries, they do not have much decision-making power in Vienna. have. While these talks are taking place between Iran and the P5 + 1, not Iran and the United States (which is basically not a member of Borjam), this approach by the Europeans has challenged the progress of the talks.
It is clear that the Western parties, who came to Vienna with the idea of granting small concessions and receiving maximum concessions, were not completely satisfied with the texts and clear demands of the Islamic Republic of Iran, but none of these countries could object to these texts or Describe the conflict with Barjam. The only point made by these countries was that, firstly, they were not even willing to grant the concessions authorized by the UN Security Council, and secondly, they were not willing to re-discuss the issues raised in the drafts. However, what has been achieved from the previous six rounds of negotiations is only a draft, and as has been said many times, there has always been a basic principle that there is no agreement unless everything is agreed.
It is now clear that the US reluctance to give up sanctions altogether is the most important challenge to the progress of the talks. We believe that whenever the US government gives up its campaign of maximum pressure and the European parties show the necessary political will in the talks, the way will be opened to reach an agreement quickly.
How did you see the general atmosphere of the conversations? Have the parties entered into serious negotiations or are they still in the process of announcing their positions?
Despite the differences in the positions of the parties, it should be noted that last week’s talks were held in a professional and explicit atmosphere, and the other sides also expressed their views in an atmosphere away from tension. In general, it can be said that a constructive atmosphere prevailed in the talks, and with the submission of draft texts by the Islamic Republic of Iran, an important and important step forward was taken in the direction of the talks. Of course, as is clear from the name of these documents, we consider the proposed texts to be negotiable drafts and we have also encouraged the other parties to put their clear texts and proposals on the table in accordance with the common principles and within the framework of Barjam.
Although there were discussions on the text during this round of talks, we expect that in the next round of talks, which will begin next weekend, the other side will also provide accurate and logical written answers and possibly new practical ideas in Vienna. Be present. In that case, one can hope that serious negotiations on the texts will begin. The other side needs to have both the interactive approach and the necessary flexibility.
Explain the content of the two documents provided to the other party. Is another document to be submitted by Iran?
As mentioned, the Iranian delegation presented two full drafts to the other side on the third day of the talks. The first draft, which addresses the issue of lifting oppressive and illegal sanctions against Iran, includes US commitments to lift sanctions. One of the points that has been emphasized in the talks with the other side is that all the sanctions imposed within the framework of the policy of maximum pressure are designed with the clear aim of eliminating Borjam, and therefore all these sanctions are related to Borjam. Another document describes the nuclear steps of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the quality of stopping the compensatory steps, if the sanctions are lifted. In this regard, it is emphasized that until the manner of lifting the sanctions is clarified and implemented, the Islamic Republic of Iran can not be expected to stop its compensatory steps, which were not an initial action, but a reaction to the sanctions.
Of course, there are other drafts that our comments will be presented in the form of these drafts. The manner and timing of the verification, the test, and the issue of receiving a guarantee that the United States will not withdraw from the agreement are among the items that will be discussed below. In recent days, we have seen a number of senators and members of Congress threaten that the United States will pull out of the nuclear deal again if a Republican president comes to power. This reflects the deep divisions within the United States and the fact that the United States is not reliable in the negotiations and must provide credible and acceptable guarantees to return to the UN Security Council. They know full well that the Islamic Republic of Iran will not allow the recurrence of the abuses that took place after the signing of the agreement in 2015 to take the Iranian economy hostage again.
Some media reports have suggested that some European delegations have called for a speedy conclusion to this round of talks and a return to the capitals. What was the reason for these countries’ position?
As I mentioned, our impression was that the European parties did not expect the Islamic Republic of Iran to submit its proposals in writing during this round of talks. That is why these countries, immediately after receiving the drafts of the Iranian delegation, demanded that they return to their countries to consult with the capitals and receive new negotiating instructions. The Islamic Republic of Iran had stated that it had sufficient decision-making power and expertise and was ready to continue the talks whenever necessary, but the opposing parties, who needed to consult with their senior officials to continue the talks, demanded that the talks be held. Stop for a few days. Accordingly, the delegations returned to their countries on Friday and are scheduled to resume talks next weekend.
The composition of the Iranian delegation, both in terms of number and composition of individuals, has been covered by the media. Explain how people are selected and how they affect conversations.
One of the issues that was emphasized before this round of talks was that the Islamic Republic should be present in the negotiations with the right decision-making power and expertise to ensure that the texts prepared and the negotiating positions of the delegation are as free as possible. Be a defect. In addition, because the government is serious about reaching a conclusion and is really trying to conclude the talks as soon as possible, it believed that it was necessary to provide the decision-making process on the spot, the process of preparing texts and providing feedback to the other party. Accelerate.
For this reason, in the weeks leading up to the talks, all bodies that are somehow related to the subject of the talks and can assist in decision-making or expert work were contacted so that their nominees could accompany the State Department delegation. To introduce. Eventually, a combination was formed that has a really high potential, both from a managerial and decision-making point of view and from an expert point of view. It should also be noted that in this round of talks, the economic weight of the delegation was much higher than in previous periods, because from the perspective of the Islamic Republic, the issue of lifting sanctions is now the main issue of the negotiations, and as long as this task It is not clear, other issues can not be finalized. Of course, it is clear that this combination will increase during the negotiations and based on low need or even if necessary.
Some opponents of the Vienna talks, including the Israeli prime minister, have called for a halt to the talks, accusing the Islamic Republic of wasting time to buy time and advance its nuclear program. What is your response to this charge?
The accusation of the lack of seriousness and timeliness of the Islamic Republic in the talks, which this time came out of the Zionist trumpet, was something we had been waiting for, but as you can see, the performance of the delegation and the rapid submission of accurate drafts To a large extent, this tactic was thwarted, and it was the other side that demanded the suspension of the talks, while the Iranian delegation was ready to continue the talks without interruption for as long as necessary. It is natural that the Zionist regime is not happy with such a situation. That is why in the same day or two, the Zionist regime’s media tried to make a negative impact on the atmosphere of the talks by fabricating and spreading several rumors.
During our meetings, we warned the other side that some foreign parties who are dissatisfied with the progress of the talks should not be allowed to influence the negotiations by spreading false and distorted news.
Some US officials, including the Secretary of State, have expressed skepticism about the outcome of the talks. What do you think about this?
Contrary to what US officials have said, I believe that an agreement is available if the other parties are in good faith and stop playing useless games of blame. The Islamic Republic of Iran has put pragmatic proposals on the table, and the other parties must respond appropriately or even present their new proposals and ideas in writing and clearly. I think making negative statements and making such statements is more of a negotiation tactic than an attempt by the other side to blame Iran in order to put pressure on the negotiators. It is enough for the opposing parties to exercise political will and declare their readiness to take the necessary practical steps. In that case, the way will be opened for agreement and settlement of disputes.
End of message