News ID : 84328
Publish Date :
Which side is concerned about the state of emergency in the Vienna talks?
Exclusive

Which side is concerned about the state of emergency in the Vienna talks?

The Western side, which has been blamed for the current unfortunate situation, exaggerates merely the existence of an emergency situation and the need to address its concerns about the rapid progress of Iran's peaceful nuclear program and speaks of a limited time as if all parties should try to use time to address the wrongdoer's concerns.

NOURNEWS - From the beginning of a new round of talks between Iran and the P4+1 on November 29th this year, the Western parties in official statements and media streams tried to include the keyword "time constraints" in the literature of this round of talks.

This media line is now going on even more intensely and has taken on new dimensions, as US Secretary of State Blinken said last night: "I do not want to set a time to return to JCPOA, but the time is very, very short."

In a similar statement, US Special Representative for Iran Robert Malley expressed hope for a speedy resumption of talks: "In the not-too-distant future, we must conclude that there is no longer a solution, and we must negotiate another full agreement, during which we will certainly enter into a period of crisis of tension."

Similar statements have been made by European officials in this context, showing that the western side of the Vienna negotiating table is consciously trying to keep the "sword of Damocles of time" above the Iranian negotiators.

Of course, the Islamic Republic of Iran has repeatedly stated that it is ready to "quickly reach a good agreement" and if the Western side agrees with Iran's proposals presented under the JCPOA agreement, it will make the formation of this event available.

It is noteworthy that the Western side is limiting the time, not because of the need to speed up the lifting of oppressive and illegal sanctions as a key basis in the agreement, but in the context of accelerating the cessation of Iran's peaceful nuclear program in accordance with safeguards. It is progress, he says.

Considering the circumstances in which the negotiations between Iran and the P4+1 took place, during which the JCPOA agreement was concluded in 2015, can help clarify the nature of the accelerators that have prevented a quick agreement from being reached in the current situation.

The JCPOA agreement was based on the agreement of the signatories to carry out two important groups of actions, including "temporarily limiting some peaceful activities of the Iranian nuclear program" and "complete and effective lifting of illegal sanctions against our country."

The two mentioned action groups are considered as the main foundations of this agreement and naturally have the same value in terms of affecting its durability and continuity, so the formation of any imbalance in the main foundations of this agreement, if it has happened now, can balance and stabilize it facing serious threats.

If the parties consider time important to reaching an agreement, they must also commit to the means of making the best use of it.

None of the parties to the JCPOA can expect that by weakening and destabilizing one of the foundations of the balance of this agreement, the other pillar will remain strong and prevent the collapse of the integrated body of the JCPOA.

Achieving a good agreement means the realization of a situation that satisfies the opinion of the parties, will certainly not be achieved by the formation of an unstable situation in the supporting pillars of JCPOA.

All parties at the negotiating table, and even the United States, which has withdrawn from the Security Council, acknowledge the fact that the reason for the current situation is Trump's withdrawal from the JCPOA and the return of sanctions on Iran, a serious blow to one of its main balances.

One year after the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA, the Islamic Republic of Iran decided to gradually reduce its obligations in response to this illegal action, and from the beginning of this process, it has repeatedly stated that all these compensatory measures are in case of return. The other parties can then return to their obligations.

Now the Western side, which has been blamed for the current unfortunate situation, is exaggerating merely on the need to address its concerns about the rapid progress of Iran's peaceful nuclear program, and speaking of time constraints as if all parties must work to address the element of time. Use the concerns of the wrong party.

Continuing to follow this irrational practice, which is based on the "superior nature of the West itself", certainly cannot lead to a result that satisfies the opinion of all stakeholders.

Today, the West is faced with the undeniable fact that sanctions, if they were to be pursued, would not have led to the economic and political collapse of Iran, nor would they have hindered the rapid development of Iran's peaceful nuclear program.

Although Iran never left the negotiating table in the years following the US withdrawal from the JCPOA, it is very clear that today, negotiations are urgently needed by the West, not Iran.

An important question that can be answered very decisively in explaining the current situation of the negotiating parties is whether Iran fails to advance its peaceful nuclear program with the withdrawal of Trump from the JCPOA and the government collapses economically and politically by imposing illegal US sanctions on Iran. In this case, did Democrat administration of Biden's and its European partners have the motivation and desire to enter into negotiations and revive JCPOA?!

What has prompted the West to return to the JCPOA, which Iran has welcomed, is not the goodwill, peace, and stability of the United States and Europe, but Iran's power to manage the many challenges posed by Western incompetence and inaction.

If Western negotiators think that Iran, despite the heavy costs it has paid to maintain its economic, political, and social stability so far, is willing to provide a complete, effective, and verifiable lifting of sanctions without providing legal and legitimate demands and a guarantee that the situation will not be repeated, in the past, and based solely on creating an atmosphere for the West to make the current situation look urgent, citing the rapid progress of Iran's nuclear program, they believed that it was willing to back down from its plundered rights, they are sorely mistaken.

The urgency of the situation today, which the West claims has only one direction, is directed towards the countries that are causing the current situation. The Vienna talks will proceed "quickly" when the principles governing it are "correct."

Although the Islamic Republic of Iran is not in any state of emergency, it has continued to put its previously announced positions on the reversibility of compensatory measures on the table.

The only reason for wasting time in the negotiations is the West trying to give less and get more.

If they are concerned about time, they should try to rationalize and constructive their behavior and speech in the negotiations, and quickly return to the commitments accepted in the JCPOA, so the good deal will be available.

BY: Mohammad Ghaderi


NOURNEWS
نظرات

نظر شما

: : :
All rights reserved for NourNews

Copyright © 2021 www.‎nournews.ir‎, All rights reserved.
nournews