END OF WORLD ISOLATION

"Done. We have the agreement," the head of EU diplomacy Federica Mogherini wrote on Twitter. "This is a decision that could pave the way for a new chapter in international relations and show that diplomacy, coordination and cooperation can go through decades of tension and confrontation. I think it's a symbol of hope for the whole world." That's how Mogherini described the signing of an historic agreement between Iran and the six international mediators (they include the five permanent members of the UN Security Council - Russia, China, USA, France, Britain and Germany). 

The negotiations on the Iranian nuclear programme lasted more than 10 years, but not very well. It was in 2004 that the Western countries began to accuse Tehran of secretly developing nuclear weapons. During this time, economic sanctions, which had no analogues in the world, became tougher. The Americans themselves called these sanctions "suffocating".

A new stage in the negotiations between the "six" and Iran came in November 2013 when they signed an "interim agreement on the Iranian nuclear programme", under which in exchange for easing the sanctions, Iran agreed to limit its nuclear programme within six months and allow IAEA inspectors to its facilities.

The final stage of the negotiations took place in Vienna. After 18 days of continuous work on the harmonization of each of the points, a document was signed. It was quite a long and thorny path. After deadlines were postponed repeatedly, pessimistic and sometimes threatening statements by the parties with mutual accusations of attempting to disrupt the negotiations and statements like "nothing is agreed" or "almost everything is agreed," all parties finally signed a 100-page document on technical and legal details.

Thorny path

The causes of complications in the negotiations were as follows. Firstly, there were significant differences within the "six". Naturally, neither China nor Russia would like to see Iran as another country possessing nuclear weapons. However, their positions on this issue are very different from the approach of European countries, mainly from the US point of view. The latter, putting forward more stringent conditions, were forced to negotiate in parallel with Russia (China's position was initially rather reserved and passive). Another reason for the delay in the process was that the range of issues discussed was more than vast. The talks covered issues such as detailed adjustment of Iran's nuclear programme, changes in the structure of nuclear reactors in Fordo and Arak, reducing the number of centrifuges at Natanz, the fate of the 8.7 tonnes of enriched uranium that Iran already possesses, etc.

On the other hand, the lifting of sanctions by the United States, Europe and the UN was also carefully discussed. Iran demanded the immediate lifting of all sanctions, while its opponents insisted on a phased process.

The negotiations were made intense by the fact that the main participants - the United States and Iran - did not trust each other. And to make sure that the document does not become still-born, every step and actions of the parties were described in detail and unambiguously. All this will make it extremely difficult for the signatories to influence the IAEA commission in the future, for example, in the case of Iraq, when the invasion of Iraq was approved because of the unconfirmed assumption that Baghdad had chemical weapons, and as a result, the country ceased to exist as a single entity. In the case of Iran, a thorough demonstration of all details complicates the likelihood of such a prospect.

The last stumbling block was the issue of lifting the arms embargo. Tehran's position was supported primarily by Russia, and to a lesser extent, by China. It's no secret that for Moscow modern Iran is, above all, an attractive and reliable market of weapons. At stake was the fate of the S-300 complexes, which Russia first promises to supply to Iran and then postpones at the last minute. It should be noted that the S-300 systems are purely defensive in nature. The West insisted that Iran is a party to Middle East conflicts in Iraq, Syria and Yemen. And if you untie its hands, it will support its allies in the region even more actively (the fact that Syrian and Iraqi terrorists are secretly supported by some Middle Eastern monarchies was passed over in silence, of course).

All the above facts slowed down and at some points, could have derailed the negotiation process. However, on 15 July the parties were still able to sign an historic agreement, and the world sighed with relief. As previously expected, under the agreement, Iran is severely limited in its nuclear programme. The plant in Fordo is transformed into a technical centre. The used fuel from the reactor in Arak will be taken out of the country, and the reactor itself will be rebuilt by an international consortium.

In addition, Tehran agrees not to enrich uranium above a threshold of 3.67 per cent and limit the amounts of uranium by 300 kg for a period of 15 years (now Iran's reserves exceed 10 tonnes). All enrichment procedures should be carried out only at the Natanz plant, where only one-third of the existing 5,000 centrifuges will remain. In exchange, economic, financial and energy sanctions will be lifted from Iran. Iran will provide IAEA and UN inspectors with the opportunity to visit its nuclear facilities, but on condition that it also participates in the process of decision-making on inspections.

In one of the fundamental points of the negotiations, namely in the arms issue, Iran conceded to the "six". Tehran will not be able to buy heavy weapons for five years and ballistic missiles and their technology - for eight years. As noted above, it was the principled position of the United States. Now President Barack Obama is to convince his country's political circles to accept the document.

Is this just the beginning?

In general, the ratification of the treaty in the United States and the reaction of some countries provide grounds to assert that the process of reconciliation between the West and Iran is not so cloudless and the hardest is yet to come.

In the US, the Republicans have already said that having a majority in parliament, they will torpedo the implementation of the agreement in every way. Of course, their votes are not enough to stop the president, as he publicly stated. In a rather sharp tone, Obama promised not to allow anyone to sabotage this "breakthrough in international relations". But the problem is complicated even more by the fact that some Democrats reject the agreement and take a common position with the Republicans. In order to prevent Obama from imposing his veto, the Republicans need only 34 votes from the Democrats. In all likelihood, sly underhand games will be played in the US capital. Talking about them, we cannot but mention the Jewish lobby, which is very likely to be actively used by Tel Aviv. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has said that this agreement is unacceptable. "Iran will grab a jackpot prize of hundreds of billions of dollars, which will allow it to continue its aggression and terror in the region and around the world," the Israeli prime minister said, arguing that after the lifting of the sanctions, Tehran will take the path of acquiring nuclear weapons. Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely is not lagging behind the prime minister. She said that her country will take all necessary measures to prevent the ratification of the "historic capitulation" in the US Congress. According to experts, in addition to the Jewish lobby, Israel will try to engage rich Americans of Jewish origin to influence "their" congressmen, threatening to terminate funding for them.

Anxiety in Tel Aviv is based on the fact that this agreement and the rapprochement between Iran and the Western world can reset the paradigms that have developed in the Middle East since 1979. The American position in the region is so weakened that the continued enmity with Iran could end in complete failure for US policy in the Middle East. The Americans need new allies in the new Middle East, because it is quite difficult to rely on the old ones represented by the kingdoms of the Gulf. Speaking of Iran as an ally of the United States, we must not forget that this is not a new ally, given relations between Tehran and Washington before the 1979 Islamic Revolution. It is clear that relations between the two countries will not be the way they were before the end of the 1970s. However, the Americans cannot completely rely only on Sunni monarchies. This explains the concern of another regional power, namely Saudi Arabia. Unlike Israel, Riyadh's response was more restrained and balanced. The Saudi statement speaks of concern about Iran's activities in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

As for the position of one of the main members of the "six" - Russia, we can talk about certain ambiguity here. On the one hand, Iran is a traditional market for Russian-made weapons, but now Russia will not be able to sell its weapons to Iran for at least five years. Instead, opportunities open for other Russian companies, but can they compete with Western or Chinese companies? The fact that Iran will enter the global energy market with its enormous volume of reserves in this sector and compete with Russia cannot but worry the Kremlin. Do not forget about the price of oil either: they have not fallen heavily yet, but the near-term outlook of experts is extremely sceptical. And it's not the most optimistic factor for Russia.

Yet Moscow can get a diplomatic benefit from the deal between Iran and the "six". The thing is that the NATO deployment of missile defence systems in Eastern European countries is officially connected with the threats posed by Iran. Russia has repeatedly stated that the real target of NATO is not Iran, but Russia. Now that there is no more nuclear threat from Iran, there is a question about the necessity of the presence of missile defence systems in Europe. This was immediately stated by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov after the signing of the agreement. But the US does not intend to abandon its missile defence system on the grounds that only the nuclear threat has been eliminated and that Iranian missiles, even without nuclear warheads, are still able to reach Europe. It is clear that Washington, to put it mildly, is disingenuous, referring to the missile threat from Iran. In light of the worsening relations with Russia, the role of the main threat to NATO belongs to Moscow.

In Iran, the signing of the agreement became a national holiday. Iranians have long wanted to end their isolation, which, we can say, they finally achieved. If we do not consider trade with the countries that maintained economic relations with Iran despite the sanctions on fettering conditions for Tehran, the shady schemes by which Iran was trying to sell oil to neighbouring countries, and banal smuggling, Iranians isolated from the outside world completely met their own needs. They were able to survive, maintain their sovereignty and show a good example to countries that threaten the West in words and fall into deep economic depression at the first risk of Western economic sanctions. The Iranians are an ancient nation, like the Chinese, Indians and Jews, but unlike the aforementioned ancient peoples, they do not yet have nuclear weapons, but they do have an ancient culture of diplomacy, which was proved by the negotiating process that ended in a clear victory for them.