“US and Seven Wrong Strategies in Diplomacy with Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, Iran Review, January 31, 2015.
Publications
Matrix of US-Iran nuclear negotiations
“Matrix of US-Iran nuclear negotiations,” Hossein Mousavian, Gulf News, January 30, 2015.
Extremism, Terrorism Ultimate Winners of Charlie Hebdo Episode
Extremism is the ultimate winner in the controversy over Charlie Hebdo’s publication of the latest cartoon with the support of the French government and other Western powers. Regrettably, the latest provocation and blatant hypocrisy of the West on the issue of freedom of expression will further the cause of the terrorists and lend support to their claim that Western powers have waged an all-out war against Islam. Furthermore, terrorist groups such as ISIS, who regard themselves the vanguard of Muslims, Islamic values and Quranic teachings would certainly celebrate new recruitments in thousands.
“Extremism, Terrorism Ultimate Winners of Charlie Hebdo Episode,” Hossein Mousavian, IRNA, January 24, 2015.
موسویان: اوباما مجبور است برای لغو تحریمها توافق کنگره را بگیرد – موسویان – ایسنا – ۴ دی ۱۳۹۳
We could build a nuclear bomb anytime
“We could build a nuclear bomb anytime,” interview with Hossein Mousavian, Daniel-Dylan Böhmer, Die Welt, January 14, 2015. (German)
What’s holding up Iran nuclear deal?
A diplomatic solution to the nuclear issue — the sooner the better — will remove the threat of any future military conflagration in the Middle East, already in tumult with the ongoing ugly violence in Syria, Yemen and Iraq. An ultimate failure of the nuclear negotiations, whether torpedoed by the Israel-US Congress joint effort or other naysayers, would play in the hands of certain quarters in Iran to push for withdrawal from the Non-Proliferation Treaty — an eventuality that I presume few people would like to face after the North Korean affair.
With the stakes as high as they are, both with the nuclear dossier and the situation in the region, it is incumbent on the US Congress to act in a way to give diplomacy a real chance and regional stability a real boost. The bottom line is clear: Both sides need each other. The United States without Iran would continue to see its problems in the region remain unresolved or even aggravated, and Iran without the United States would continue to suffer in other ways.
“What’s holding up Iran nuclear deal?” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, January 7, 2015.
Why geopolitical shifts dictate nuclear deal with Iran
Although a week of high-level talks between Iran and world powers in Vienna made good progress, negotiators failed to reach an agreement and instead set a new deadline of March 1, 2015, for a framework agreement on Iran’s nuclear program and a July 1 deadline for the final agreement, including annexes.
As a result of the tectonic developments in the Middle East in recent years, the geopolitics of the region have shifted significantly. Amid 35 years of all-out sanctions and pressure on Iran, the outcomes of the Middle East’s ebbs and flows include Iran’s emergence as the most stable country in the area and as a regional power, Arab countries either in turmoil or vulnerable to unrest and destabilization and the unprecedented rise of violent extremist groups. These developments could serve as the impetus for an Iranian-Western rapprochement, despite the inconclusive talks in Vienna.
“Why geopolitical shifts dictate nuclear deal with Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, Al Monitor, November 27, 2014.
Ankara tries to recast war on terror
While the emergence of terrorism in unprecedented forms has sent tremors of anxiety around the globe, Turkey unyieldingly swims against the tide. Despite its Nato membership, it adamantly refuses to participate in multilateral actions with the United States and its allies, Arab countries, Iran, Russia and Syria. While these countries have not acted in unison, they are engaged in a massive endeavour aimed at bringing down Daesh (Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) and eliminating terrorist groups.
The question, then: “What motivates Turkey to act unilaterally despite further isolating itself from the global community?”
“Ankara tries to recast war on terror,” Hossein Mousavian, Gulf News, November 16, 2014.
How Iran and world powers can reach nuclear deal
The ninth round of talks between Iran and the so-called P5+1 group of world powers ended on Tuesday without a breakthrough to seal a deal over Iran’s nuclear programme ahead of a 24 November deadline.
“It would be wrong to speak about any kind of major progress” at the Oman talks, but “there was no setback, no disruption and no deadlock,” Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told Russia’s RIA Novosti news agency.
Moreover, as German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said, the West was facing a “make-or-break moment” to reach a deal with Iran over its nuclear programme.
While the likelihood of reaching a comprehensive package is low, it is still possible for the sides to agree on the general outlines of a nuclear accord before the deadline.
At the moment the key sticking points to a deal are twofold: the need to resolve issues of uranium enrichment capacity, and the timing and pace of the removal of sanctions.
With major progress already achieved in previous rounds of talks, other questions such as limits on enrichment levels, size of uranium stockpiles, and allowing inspections at Iran’s Fordo nuclear plant can be resolved if the two inter-related issues can be worked out.
Three-phase approach
There are ways this can be done. The principle should be that transparency and confidence-building measures by Iran and sanctions relief by the world powers go hand-in-hand and can be adjusted in a reciprocal fashion. This could be achieved through a phased approach:
Phase one
For immediate implementation after a deal is signed. In this phase, Iran should:
- Agree to the provisional implementation of the Additional Protocol of the nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty (NPT) – which includes snap visits by International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors – signed but suspended by Iran in 2007
- Agree to provisional implementation of the modified Subsidiary Arrangement (Code 3.1) to the IAEA’s Safeguards Agreement – requiring signatory states to report any decisions to build new nuclear facilities but suspended by Iran since 2007
- Continue to cap uranium enrichment at 5% as agreed in November 2013
- Begin converting the enrichment site at Fordo to an R&D site
- Begin technical conversions at the heavy water facility at Arak to limit the production of plutonium, (material which can be used in a nuclear weapon)
- Begin addressing the Possible Military Dimension issues (PMDs) of Iran’s nuclear programme with the IAEA
- Continue not to reprocess spent nuclear fuel at the Arak plant
- Begin limiting the current stockpiles of uranium to the level of practical needs
- Cap the enrichment capacity at the current operational level of about 9,400 centrifuges and not activate the other 12,000 already installed but not operational
These measures would guarantee the maximum level of Iran’s transparency and no so-called “breakout” capability – ie rush to make a bomb.
In return, the world powers should suspend all unilateral and multilateral sanctions.
Phase two
For implementation over a possible six-month period. In this phase Iran should:
- Complete a technical redesign of Arak heavy water facilities which would lower the current capacity of 10kg plutonium production to 1kg per year
- Complete conversion of Fordo as an R&D site
- Resolve PMD issues with the IAEA
- Approve Additional Protocol in the cabinet and submit to Parliament.
In return, the world powers should lift all sanctions imposed by European Union and the United Nations Security Council’s economic sanctions, while the US unilateral sanctions remain suspended.
Phase three
Phase three, as the final phase, should be completed before the end of President Barack Obama’s term in office. In this phase Iran should:
- Ratify the Additional Protocol by Parliament
- Approve at Cabinet level the Safeguard Agreement Code 3.1
- Commit to cap the level of the enrichment at 5% for a longer period to be agreed by negotiations
- Commit not to reprocess spent fuel at Arak for a longer period to be agreed by negotiations
- Commit to cap the stockpile of uranium at a level that is needed for domestic practical needs a longer period to be agreed by negotiations
‘Maximum transparency’
While Iran does not need to reprocess and enrich beyond 5% for many years, a longer period on these three phases would meet the world powers’ demand for longer duration of confidence-building measures on no “breakout”.
In return, the US should lift all unilateral sanctions suspended in phase one and the UNSC should lift the proliferation sanctions and normalise the Iranian nuclear dossier at the United Nations and the IAEA.
The P5+1 needs assurances of maximum transparency on the Iranian nuclear programme and confidence there will be no “breakout”.
Iran’s two main objectives are respecting its rights for peaceful nuclear technology, including enrichment, and lifting the unilateral and multilateral related sanctions.
This package includes the two key objectives of the world powers and Iran with a realistic timetable and proportionate reciprocations.
“How Iran and world powers can reach nuclear deal,” Hossein Mousavian, BBC, November 16, 2014.
Iran: Assessing New, Emerging Geopolitics in the Middle East
The Middle East has experienced profound changes since the Afghanistan War in 2001, which have brought about the emergence of new actors and new challenges for the region. For the ambassador and researcher at Princeton University, Seyed Hossein Mousavian, the international threat represented by the expansion of terrorism in Iraq and Syria has opened a new path of hope in the negotiations on the Teheran nuclear programme, given that it is a sufficient incentive both to forge new alliances and for Iran to reach a security and cooperation agreement with the USA and its allies for stability in the region.
“Iran: Assessing New, Emerging Geopolitics in the Middle East,” Hossein Mousavian, European Institute of the Mediterranean: IEMed Mediterranean Yearbook 2014. Published by IEMed, November 2014.
