Daily Times

Following protracted negotiations lasting for weeks, Iran and US-led western countries signed a historic nuclear agreement on July 16. The agreement is the revised and comprehensive version of the framework agreed in April. Iran will reduce its number of uranium centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,000 and its stockpiles of enriched uranium will be reduced from 10,000 kilogrammes to 300. The Fordow enrichment site will be converted into a research centre and the heavy water reactor at Arak will be redesigned to produce only one kilogramme of plutonium per annum. The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will have greater access to nuclear sites including, if necessary, military installations. Iran will not enrich uranium over 3.67 percent, needed for its nuclear power plants, for 15 years. All nuclear-related sanctions will be suspended following verifications that Iran is in compliance of its commitments. The agreement has already been submitted to the UN Security Council (UNSC) to be re-codified and sanctions will be lifted once the IAEA certifies Iran’s compliance. The agreement has outlined how the sanctions will be eased and Iran will regain access to its frozen assets in the US and Europe. Experts maintain that Iran, which was suspected of being close to a few weeks in making the bomb, has now been pushed back by a year.
The most virulent criticism of the agreement came from Israeli Prime Minister (PM) Benjamin Netanyahu. He termed the deal a historic mistake and said that Iran was going to receive a sure path to nuclear weapons. Netanyahu resolved to work with Republican members of the US Congress to stall the approval process. His education minister condemned the agreement and said, “Today a terrorist, nuclear superpower is born and it will go down as one of the darkest days in world history.” Republican lawmakers denounced the agreement but their tunes were less dissonant than before.
President Obama strongly defended the agreement and said, “This deal demonstrates that US diplomacy can bring about real and meaningful change.” He added that it would ensure that Iran would find no possibility in achieving a rapid nuclear “weapons breakout” for at least the next decade. In a press conference, Obama expressed dismay over criticism and said the critics had failed to propose any alternative. He added, “Either the issue of Iran obtaining nuclear weapons is resolved diplomatically through a negotiation or through force, through war.” If critics prefer war they should have the courage to openly advocate it. Secretary of State John Kerry defended the deal he and his team had negotiated and said, “The real fear of that region should be that there is no deal.” He warned that if Congress rejected the agreement, the international community would abandon the US and echoed Obama’s concern that “you will have a war”. Kerry added: “It is better to push back against an Iran that does not have a nuclear weapon rather than one that does.”
Defence Secretary Ashton Carter felt Israel should have no fear of a nuclear Iran as the agreement had stripped off the possibility of making nuclear weapons. Saudi Arabia made a cautious reaction and said that if sanctions are lifted Iran will try harder to redesign the region. Its diplomat said, “Maybe we will look for other partners like China if the US gives everything to Iran.” Turkey has indicated it will increase the import of Iranian oil. Iran has expressed hope that the agreement will enable Tehran and Washington to work together to fight Islamic State (IS), which holds territory in Iraq and Syria.
Leaving aside political rhetoric, the crux of the matter is that the agreement has marked the closure of an era characterised by hostility, intrigue and suspicion, which has lasted for about 37 years. It has been an honest and courageous attempt by both Obama and Rouhani to bury the past and move forward. The hardest challenge emanates not from outside but by the hawks actively operating in Iran and in the US. Tehran has been a close ally of Washington for a long period though this period bears witness to US interference in the internal politics of Iran. The nuclear programme in Iran was initiated with the support of the US during the reign of Shah Pahlavi. Notwithstanding the public animosity between Washington and Tehran, a large number of Iranians fervently aspires for friendly relations with the US. This agreement will provide a window to transform these wishes into practice.
The lifting of sanctions will allow Tehran to retrieve $ 150 billion frozen in the US and Europe. US oil companies are looking forward to investing in the upgrading of oil infrastructure in Iran. But this will require mutual trust and honest implementation of the agreement. The decades long hostility and suspicion cannot be expected to be removed overnight.
It is undeniable that the behaviour of Tehran’s leaderships in the past has not been conducive to peace in the region. The irresponsible and uncalled for utterances of former President Ahmadinejad in denying the holocaust and threatening to wipe out Israel from the world map prompted the international community to rally around Israel. On the other hand, the belligerent attitude of Israel towards destroying nuclear installations inside Iran and its staunch opposition to any rapprochement with Iran suggests that Israel believes in maintaining nuclear hegemony in the Middle East. Tehran accused Tel Aviv of complicity in the assassination of five nuclear scientists in Iran in recent months. Israel, having a stockpile of over 120 nuclear wearpons, not only opposed reconciliation with Iran, it also wanted US partnership in launching military strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Israel vehemently campaigned against working out any deal with Iran by the US-led international community. Obama’s preference of diplomatic overtures over armed intervention has caused irritation in the Israeli leadership.
Iran’s emergence as a regional power following “regime change” in Iraq and now after making the nuclear deal with the US, EU, China and Russia has brought the recognition that Tehran does have a role in the settlement of crises in the region but has caused consternation in Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. This concern is not totally unfounded. Washington’s efforts to assure its allies will not allay fears completely. The onus will be on Tehran to reformulate its external policy and win the confidence of its neighbours in the Gulf. Iran should also engage with Amman, Cairo, Riyadh and Ankara in order to promote friendly relations. Trimming the Revolutionary Guards, establishing an independent judiciary and promoting human rights at home will go a long way in Tehran’s acceptance in the international community. Restoring stability in Iraq and working out a just solution in Syria will be a litmus test for the leadership in Iran. President Rouhani and President Obama showed brinkmanship in making the nuclear agreement.

The writer is a former official of the United Nations