Biden’s return to the nuclear deal with Iran is getting harder

DUBAI, UAE – Iran and the USA are at an impasse.

President Joe Biden’s government wants to revive the 2015 nuclear deal, but is demanding to see changes in Tehran before lifting the heavy sanctions imposed on the country by the Trump team.

Meanwhile, Iran says it wants Washington to step up its game and take the first step, refusing to budge until sanctions are lifted.

Iran set the deadline for Sunday, February 21, promising that, if banking and oil sanctions are not lifted by then, UN inspectors will not have access to its nuclear facilities.

Political boldness raises questions about Biden’s plans to save a deal that has been effectively suspended since former President Donald Trump pulled the U.S. out of him in 2018.

The Iranian nuclear deal, also called the Joint Global Action Plan (JCPOA), was led by the Obama administration and involved several other world powers. It lifted international sanctions against Iran, offering the country 83 million economic aid in exchange for restrictions on its nuclear program, which included mandatory inspections by the UN International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

Any removal of IAEA inspectors “would make a deal much more difficult to reach; without mechanisms to monitor Iran’s nuclear program, the distrust of the United States and other parts of the JCPOA would deepen,” wrote Torbjorn Soltvedt, chief MENA analyst at Verisk Maplecroft in a research note this week.

The ultimatum aims to pressure Washington to take action. But the shot could backfire, says Behnam ben Taleblu, a senior member of the Washington-based Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

Iran’s term threat is “designed to increase the risks and fears in Washington about the direction of the nuclear program. Risks and fears that Tehran hopes Washington will improve with concessions and premature sanctions relief,” Taleblu told CNBC.

But the growing nuclear violations – even under Biden – “can help propel Europe towards Washington, which now has a more limited policy for Iran,” he warned.

And the Islamic Republic did not hesitate to break the parameters of the agreement after Biden’s election, in actions that former JCPOA negotiators described as “provocative” and “serious”. The stakes have been on the rise since May 2019, a year after the Trump administration withdrew from the agreement and began imposing “maximum pressure” sanctions on the country for what it called “destabilizing regional behavior”.

Iranian officials have already emphasized that the violations are reversible once Washington offers relief from sanctions.

But that relief is unlikely anytime soon, as Biden’s goals under the deal face the lack of support from much of Congress and his team wants to avoid appearing “indulgent” with Iran.

According to Sanam Vakil, an Iran expert and deputy head of Chatham House’s MENA program, this is not as much of a chicken game as it sounds.

“It’s not really a chicken game. It’s really about the Biden government finding out how they want to proceed and execute and make the transition, and the internal difficulties in the US have really prevented what could have been a quicker reentry,” she said.

And the stalemate, Vakil believes, is yet another debate over the order in which certain concessions will be made.

“What we are seeing happening in the public domain is a debate about sequencing,” she said.

“Iranians are publicly saying ‘we need you to lift all sanctions before we do anything’. And of course they are going to say that because they need to know where the US is, what the US red lines are – they have limited confidence in the process today. “

Henry Rome, regional analyst for the Eurasia Group, says the Biden government “is considering making an initial gesture to Iran, with the aim of showing a commitment to return to the JCPOA and encouraging Iran to accept negotiations without giving up significant US influence. “.

Such a move would be largely symbolic, but could include lifting sanctions on individuals, removing the US objection to an IMF loan or facilitating humanitarian trade.

“If the United States offers a tangible sign of progress before (February 21), that date, that may be enough for the Iranian leadership to circumvent these conditions,” said Roma.

Ultimately, what is much more important to the survival of the US-Iran deal and relations is what will happen on June 18 – Iran’s presidential election, which could have a much more hard-line and anti-American elected leader.

The race for this election “will give a clearer indication of the supreme Ayatollah leader Ali Khamenei ‘s willingness to endorse another serious effort to reach an agreement” on the nuclear issue, said Soltvedt of Verisk.

“An agreement between Iran and the US before that is a remote prospect, and the risk of Khamenei moving away from the JCPOA this year will remain high.”