Iran Hardliners Say US Instigated Protests As Pressure Before Nuclear Talks

Bahram Einollahi told local media that “despite all precautions” the spread of the new strain is a possibility, and the government will closely monitor the situation. He visited Tehran’s international airport on Saturday to review screening procedures.

Iran was the second country after China in early 2020 where the coronavirus spread and became an epidemic. There have been more than 6 million cases and 130,000 deaths according to official figures, disputed by critics who say the death toll could be twice higher than what the government says.

A slow start to vaccination led to tens of thousands of more deaths from June to September in Iran but the fifth wave of the pandemic, as it was called, has slowed down in recent weeks.

Iran’s embassy in South Africa has warned citizens living in six African countries to be vigilant about protecting themselves against the coronavirus. These countries are South Africa, Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, Lesotho and Eswatini. A health official in Iran also warned citizens from travelling to these countries.

Negotiators will convene in Vienna on Monday in a last-ditch effort to salvage a nuclear deal which the United States under then-President Donald Trump quit in 2018, reimposing sanctions on Iran. That led to breaches of the deal by Tehran, and dismayed the other powers involved.

Israel, which is not a party to the talks, opposed the original 2015 pact as too limited in scope and duration. Israeli leaders have long threatened military action against Iran if they deem diplomacy a dead end for denying it nuclear weaponry.

"Israel is very worried about the readiness to remove the sanctions and to allow a flow of billions (of dollars) to Iran in exchange for unsatisfactory restrictions in the nuclear realm," Bennett told his cabinet in televised remarks.

"This is the message that we are relaying in every manner, whether to the Americans or to the other countries negotiating with Iran."

Few expect a breakthrough in the talks as Iran's uranium enrichment activities have escalated in an apparent bid to gain leverage against the West.

Reporting by Reuters

Holding pictures of their loved ones who died in the incident calling the trial a sham and “illegal”, demanding the prosecution of those in command and not low-ranking officers.

The protesters also chanted slogans against the Revolutionary Guard and Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, while surrounded by a heavy presence of security forces.

Some of the victims’ families say that the downing of a Ukrainian flight from Tehran to Kiev after takeoff by two IRGC missiles was a premeditated act amid military tensions with the United States.

The plane with 176 passengers and crew was targeted on January 8, 2020, hours after Iran fired ballistic missiles at US bases in Iraq and was on alert for a possible retaliation. But authorities did not close the civilian airspace and tried to deny they had shot down the passenger plane.

Victims' families and critics say those on trial are not responsible for decisions taken at a higher level on the night of the incident. They say Amir-Ali Hajizadeh, the Revolutionary Guards aerospace commander was responsible because he did not “clear the airspace.”

"If Iran thinks it can use this time to build more leverage and then come back and say they want something better it simply won't work. We and our partners won't go for it," US Special Envoy for Iran, Robert Malley, told the BBC News Hour.

But Iran has already built leverage, according to Fars news agency in Tehran affiliated with the Revolutionary Guard. In an article signed by a writer with hardliner credentials on Sunday, questioning an interim or partial deal, the hardline media outlet said that Western estimates of Iran being a few weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for a bomb are true.

Indirect nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, with the participation of major powers, resume on Monday after a five-month hiatus, while the idea of an interim deal has been mentioned in recent days. Iran has rejected the idea, but the Fars article leaves the door ajar.

It seems that negotiations have already started even before the first meeting convenes in Vianna. "If that's Iran's approach, which is to try to use the negotiations as cover for an accelerated nuclear program, and as I say, drag its feet at the nuclear table, we will have to respond in a way that is not our preference," said Malley, who heads up the US negotiating team. "Nobody should be surprised if at that point there is increased pressure on Iran.

"We hope not to get that there, but if we are, then pressure will have to increase to send a message to Iran that the choice it is making is the wrong one. That it has a different path available to it, but it's not a path open indefinitely because Iran's nuclear program is putting the very essence of the deal negotiated (in 2015) at risk," he said.

But Fars said in its article that the West has few tools to exert more pressure on Iran, given the energy crunch in the world, arguing that some countries are willing to clandestinely buy oil from Iran.

Fars also said that the West is clearly concerned about advances Iran has made and its decision to restrict monitoring by UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). That is why they are eager for a partial agreement that would stop Iran’s higher-degree uranium enrichment in exchange for reduction of sanctions on Iran’s oil exports. But the US is not willing to provide permanent guarantees that reduced sanctions would not be reversed in the future, Fars argued.

The article went on to say that interim or partial agreements in Iran’s 18-year nuclear talks with the West is not a new idea and was tried before with mixed results, and will not work in this case. Iran has been demanding the full removal of all US sanctions imposed since 2018 and if Tehran accepts an interim deal, it will mean it buckled under the pressure of sanctions.

But the Fars article does not reject the idea of an interim deal altogether and says, “If the West is willing to make serious concessions over Iran’s oil sales and the repatriation of the proceeds, it might be possible to theoretically consider [an interim deal], provided that Iran’s presence in the global oil market is guaranteed.”

Since previous United States president Donald Trump pulled the US from the agreement in 2018, Washington has imposed ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions while Iran has since 2019 expanded its nuclear program beyond JCPOA limits.

The US presidential envoy on Iran, Robert Malley, told US public radio (NPR) this week that he was waiting to see what the new Iranian negotiators appointed by president Ebrahim Raisi (Raeesi) would “say when they’re at the table” when the Vienna talks resume.

“Obviously the indications they've given − and we're not the only ones who've heard those indications − are not particularly encouraging,” Malley said.

The envoy criticized Iran’s expressed desire for American guarantees that it would not withdraw once again from the deal, once renewed: “If those are the kinds of demands they make, that's tantamount to saying, we don't really want a deal; we just want to spend the next few months building our nuclear program.”

Plan B

NPR also interviewed Michael Singh, a senior security official in the George W Bush administration, who argued that the Biden administration − which came to office committed to reviving the JCPOA but has continued maximum pressure sanctions and introduced new ones − needed a ‘plan B’.

Malley told NPR only that the US was looking at “other efforts – diplomatic and otherwise” to curb Iran’s nuclear program. He said that if Tehran started “getting too close, too close for comfort [to capacity to make a weapon], then, of course, we will not be prepared to sit idly by.”

The administration of President Joe Biden is under domestic pressure with its popularity falling since the August withdrawal from Afghanistan. Some top Democrats in Congress are lukewarm at best and nearly all Republicans strongly opposed.

Formal talks in Vienna are between the remaining members of the JCPOA – China, France, Germany, Iran, Russia and the United Kingdom – so adding the complication that the US delegation in the Austrian capital takes part only indirectly.

Russia, China, Europe

Russia and China have called on both the US and Iran to return to the JCPOA, while insisting there is special onus on Washington as the party that left the agreement, even after it voted in favor at the United Nations Security Council.

While the three western European states’ position is formally similar to Russia and China – calling on both Washington and Tehran to adhere to the JCPOA – the E3 has expressed growing concern at the expanding Iranian nuclear program and at Iran’s limiting its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to that required under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).

The E3 told the IAEA board meeting this week that the Iran’s atomic activities, especially enriching uranium to 60 percent and using more advanced centrifuges, was “irreversibly reducing the counter-proliferation value of the JCPOA.”

Russia in contrast played down concerns over Iran expressed by IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi. Moscow’s IAEA ambassador Mikhail Ulyanov said these were a “constant irritant” but had “little practical meaning in terms of proliferation risks.” Ulyanov accepted that while these issues needed to be “clarified and closed” the real challenge was restoring the JCPOA.

GCC, Israel

The Gulf Cooperation Council, in a statement from its Iran working group November 17, supported a return to the JCPOA, moderating its past opposition. The GCC said renewal would “help pave the way for inclusive diplomatic efforts to address all issues that are necessary to ensure sustainable safety, security and prosperity in the region.”

But Israel has maintained strong opposition to JCPOA revival. Defense Minister Benny Gantz said this week that any Iran agreement should restrict its missile program and regional alliances. Gantz emphasized his government’s commitment to “build our military might,” which Israeli media reported led to $1.5 billion allocated October for preparations to attack Iran.