Articles, Publications

Outlines of a Compromise

The world powers and Iran can agree on six principles:

No nuclear weapon in the Middle East.

A ban on production of plutonium and reprocessing in the Middle East.

Stopping the production of highly enriched uranium, with no enrichment beyond five percent in the Middle East.

No stockpiling beyond domestic needs for nuclear civilian use.

Establishment of a regional or international consortium for producing nuclear fuel.

Regional confidence-building and verification measures by creating a regional authority in charge of regulating nuclear development and verifying its peaceful nature in the region.

This would be the best path to reach the “comprehensive package” deal on the Iranian nuclear dilemma. The next six months of diplomacy will be decisive and the world powers and Iran should be open to pursuing an agenda of long-term co-operation. Iran’s nuclear deal has the potential to begin controlling fissile material in the Middle East and take meaningful steps toward a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and all other weapons of mass destruction.

Read More

“Outlines of a compromise,” Hossein Mousavian, The Security Times, January 31, 2014.

Essays, Publications

Solution to Iranian nuclear dossier & its role on the Middle East Zone Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction (MEWMDFZ)

Over a decade of nuclear negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) and Germany) have failed. The window for a diplomatic resolution will be most opportune during the second term of President Obama and the election of moderate Iranian president Hassan Rouhani. They have both voiced their readiness for a diplomatic resolution to the current standoff. There is, however, a risk that if the current US/Western policy of pressure politics continues, we will inch toward a military confrontation. In a broader sense, the outcome of the nuclear negotiations will have a profound impact on nuclear non-proliferation, Nuclear Weapons Free Zone (NWFZ) and Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone (WMDFZ) in the Middle East. The proposed paper will examine the prospects for a breakthrough in nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1. A negotiated settlement will be based on the framework of the nuclear Non- Proliferation Treaty (NPT), with measures to address key demands from all parties involved. For the P5+1, this includes transparency and verification over the nature of Iranian nuclear program, ensuring there will be no breakout capability. For the Iranians, their main demand includes recognition of their rights under the NPT, including enrichment and lifting sanctions. Any negotiated settlement on the Iranian nuclear file will inevitably introduce modified and newly formulated measures and technical modalities, which will enhance non-proliferation efforts. These milestones will pave the way to strengthen the call for concerted efforts to realize the WMDFZ in the Middle East.

Read Policy Paper

“Solution to Iranian nuclear dossier & its role on the Middle East Zone Free of Weapons of Mass Destruction (MEWMDFZ),” Hossein Mousavian, European University Institute, Policy Paper, No.22. Published by Robert Schuman Centre for Advanced Studies Global Governance Program, December 2013.

Essays, Publications

Solving the Nuclear Conflict with Iran

Key Points:

  • The breakthrough in the negotiations with regard to the Iranian nuclear program was reached because the parameters of the negotiations have changed. This enabled rapprochement between Iran and the United States. The willingness of the P5+1 to accept limited enrichment and provide sanctions relief was key to securing Iranian consent.
  • A sustainable solution to the nuclear conflict with Iran can be agreed upon only on the basis of the NPT and necessitates an end to the discrimination of Iran compared to other member states. Measures that go beyond the provisions of the NPT can be complied with for a specified period of time as a confidence building measure.
  • A final deal can be reached if US-Iran relations are further improved to guarantee domestic US support for an agreement.

Read Policy Brief

“Solving the Nuclear Conflict with Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, Korber Policy Brief, No.2. Published by Korber Foundation, December 2013. 

Articles, Publications

Iran and the nuclear agreement: Trust but verify

The Joint Plan of Action signed in Geneva represents a serious step toward defusing the longstanding dispute between Iran and the West over Iran’s nuclear program. Both sides negotiated seriously and in good faith, overcoming substantial problems while achieving an important agreement.

For the interim agreement to work, however, both sides need to commit unequivocally to fully meeting the obligations on time. There is no room for delays, obfuscation, excuses.

This is not simply a matter of building trust or goodwill. Yes, an interim agreement has been reached, but with 30-plus years of deep distrust and enmity between Iran and the West as the backdrop. There is no sugarcoating the distrust or sense of victimization that pervades this agreement, and the feeling on both sides that the other will not fulfill its obligations or, more bluntly, will cheat.

Read More

“Iran and the nuclear agreement: Trust but verify,” Daniel Kurtzer, Seyed Hossein Mousavian and Thomas Pickering, Al-Monitor, December 6, 2013.

Articles, Publications

The committee to save Syria

All parties should support U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon’s efforts. Geneva 2 talks could be productive if all concerned stakeholders, including Iran, Assad and opposition leaders, are included. The group should call for a genuine cease-fire backed by regional and international powers. Participants must agree on several further principles and goals. First, there must be concerted effort to prevent Syria’s disintegration through measures that mitigate sectarian vengeance. Key government, military and security structures must be retained, while terrorist and extremist elements must be marginalized. All parties to the talks should back robust humanitarian assistance to alleviate the suffering of civilians. The parties should also consider the establishment of a regional cooperation mechanism to address current and future security challenges. The Syrian conflict has polarized the country; to foster national unity, therefore, there is a need for a forum for national dialogue. Finally, parties to the talks should support a new democracy by holding free and fair elections for the presidency, parliament and a committee to draw a new constitution — administered and supervised by the United Nations.

Geneva 2 offers the prospect of a political solution to the Syrian conflict. But if the talks fail, the Syrian conflict can escalate and spill over across the region. Parties to the talks have a responsibility not to allow that to happen.

Read More

“The committee to save Syria,” Hossein Mousavian, Al Jazeera America, November 25, 2013.

Essays, Publications

Does Iran Seek Nuclear Weapons?

This paper presents a comprehensive explanation as to why Iran is not after a nuclear bomb and provides twenty-five reasons to strengthen this position. Examples range from a chronology of Israeli accusations that claim Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons; elaborating on the findings by the International Atomic Energy Agency’s inspectors of Iranian nuclear facilities; the Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei’s viewpoint on nuclear weapons; the findings of US and other Western intelligence agency’s regarding the Iran’s nuclear capability; and instances of missed opportunity that have evaded a resolution of the nuclear dossier. Furthermore, the paper elaborates on a framework for diplomatic solution to the nuclear standoff and its contribution to the realization of Weapons of Mass Destruction Free Zone in the Middle East.

Read Paper

“Does Iran Seek Nuclear Weapons?” Hossein Mousavian, International Studies Journal (ISJ), Vol. 10, No. 2, pp. 129-142. Published by the International Studies Journal, November 2013.

Articles, Publications

7 Reasons Iran nuclear deal a win-win for all parties

The negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program held in Geneva, Nov. 7–9, made unprecedented progress toward an agreement. US Secretary of State John Kerry announced at the conclusion of the talks, “We came to Geneva to narrow the differences, and I can tell you without any reservations, we made significant progress. It takes time to build confidence between countries that have really been at odds with each other for a long time now.”

The French position, however, surprised everyone. Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius warned that a rush to an agreement would be a “fool’s game.” Informed sources told Al-Monitor that Britain, China, Germany, Russia, and the United States and Iran had been amenable to signing a draft agreement but that Paris then moved to block the deal. There are 7 reasons to help France, the US Congress, Israel and some of the Arab states rethink their position, which is blocking a win-win deal.

Read More

“7 Reasons Iran nuclear deal a win-win for all parties,” Hossein Mousavian, Al-Monitor, November 9, 2013.

Articles, Publications

The road to finalizing a nuclear deal with Iran

A decade of nuclear negotiations failed because the U.S. was not ready to respect the rights of Iran to enrich uranium for civilian use under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). America’s stance changed in Geneva. “We found the Iranian presentation very useful,” White House press secretary Jay Carney said after four rounds of talks ended on Wednesday evening. “The Iranian proposal was a new proposal with a level of seriousness and substance that we had not seen before.”

Four major reasons accounted for the change in dynamics between Iran and the U.S. this time, compared with previous, unproductive discussions.

Read More

“The road to finalizing a nuclear deal with Iran,” Hossein Mousavian, Al-Jazeera America, October 18, 2013.