Balancing "political wheels"

The next term of signing the agreement on the nuclear program of Iran has expired

On Monday, November 24, the deadline has expired for signing an agreement on Iran’s nuclear program. As a result, at negotiations in Vienna Iran and the state of the so -called "six", they could not solve the dispute around the Iranian nuclear program and extended negotiations for another seven months. Western representatives said that they initially sought to develop an agreement for March, but came to the conclusion that it would take more time for consensus in all important technical details.

British Foreign Minister Philip Hammond said that the so -called "joint action plan" will be extended until June 30, 2015. In accordance with the temporary agreement agreed on a year ago, Iran stopped the enrichment of Uranus in exchange for mitigation of sanctions and providing this country with access to frozen banking accounts with revenue from oil exports.

From the very beginning, the parties admitted that the discrepancies between them were very significant. They relate, for example, the number of centrifuges that Iran can preserve, and the possibilities of their modernization; The procedure for the abolition of economic sanctions imposed against Tehran, as well as the validity of the future agreement. But, regardless of whether it will be possible to eliminate all the contradictions, the very participation of Iran in the negotiation process with the world powers on the acute strategic issue changed the alignment of political forces within the country.

Emmanuel Otlengi

Among the unresolved problems: the regime of inspections of the Iranian nuclear facilities by the IAEA employees and the full report of Iran about their past nuclear events, which, presumably, had a military orientation. But if you focus on domestic policy: are there any other opinions in the Iranian leadership regarding nuclear negotiations with five permanent members of the UN Security Council Plus by Germany? And if so, how deep are these differences? The opinion of the Expert of the "Democracy Protection" Emmanuel Otlengi:

- Yes, there were always disagreements in the leadership, and they concerned both the very desire and expediency of negotiations, and the nature of the compromise, which should go to Tehran in order to achieve an agreement. These disagreements intensified on the eve of last year's presidential elections and aggravated even more after the victory relatively moderate politician Hassan Rukhani . Today, disputes are no longer raging around whether Iran’s participation in a nuclear dialog is a sign of surrender before the UN Security Council. The question of the attitude to the requirement of the international community about the complete suspension of work on the enrichment of Uranus; Western negotiators removed this requirement on their own initiative. Now the discussions are maintained only about the size of the concessions that Iran will agree to - about the size of the centrifuge park, for example. About modification, but in no case about dismantling a heavy -water reactor in Arak. And, of course, that Iran should ask for these concessions in the opposite side in exchange.

We have reason to believe that the pluralism of opinions in the highest echelons of power in Iran regarding the nuclear program is not ostentatious, but quite real, translated through publications close to rival camps in the leadership, which is confirmed by our informed sources within Iran, including diplomats of European countries. Open information about the nuclear program, I must admit, is not very detailed. However, why details, if officially this program has an exclusively civil purpose? A completely different matter is cheap propaganda that Tehran spreads from the first days of the existence of his nuclear project, trying to imagine it as a peaceful undertaking that has nothing to do with weapons developments. What are that it is completely ridiculous, allegedly incompatible with the instructions of Shiite Islam, ”says Emmanuel Otlengi.

Ayatollah sees the key to the survival of the regime in nuclear weapons, and Rukhani in removing the economic blockade from Iran

With the assumption of President Hassan Rukhani in Iran, statements sound louder that if the completion of nuclear negotiations and the recognition of Iran of an important place in the Persian Gulf of Persian, which suits him, has every reason to count on the normalization of relations in the economic field. As well as for cooperation on a number of important military-political issues, including the fight against the Taliban and Islamic State terrorist organizations. The promises in the military-political region are very doubtful, Emmanuel Otlengi noted. The Iranians, according to him, "strongly dislike the Taliban," but after the US troops entered Afghanistan in 2001, it was Tehran who supplied the Mojahideen with improved roadside mines on which the Americans were undermined. Information in the publications close to the "guards of the Islamic revolution" expressing anxiety about the prospects for the return of Western commercial interests to Iran deserves much more confidence. These interests are convinced by conservatives, are an extremely dangerous form of the "soft power" of the United States and their allies. The expert of the “Democracy Protection Fund” recalled in this connection the disposal of the spiritual leader Ali Khamenei, restricting official contacts with the Americans only the circle of employees of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs:

Alice Nader

"Rukhani and other reformers for the sake of lifting economic sanctions, and to prevent a possible force action on the part of Israel, offer to conclude a nuclear agreement with the world powers, but I really doubt that these people are actually standing for a comprehensive detachment with the West," an employee of the RAND RAND RAND, they are not interested in establishing a genuine Democracy will be demonstrated that Shiite Islam is compatible with political pluralism The leader loves to repeat the words of Khomeini about the fact that the revolution was arranged not to lower the price of watermelons. The blockade does not feel all the severity of them, they are not responsible to the people for the price that he pays for their ambitions, and Rukhani carries and understands how great this severity is, ”said the Rand research institute.

They are interested in business contacts with the West. They consider it extremely unreasonable to orient the Iranian economy on Russia and China

The revolutionary guard, among other things, oversees the nuclear project and does not want to limit its freedom of action in any way, emphasizes Alice Nader. At the same time, the guards are afraid that if successful in the field of nuclear diplomacy, the influence of Rukhani gets stronger, and he will be able to carry out reforms in areas such as public finances and especially secondary and higher education, which to this day are a stronghold of conservatives. The guard sees in the president a certain connecting link between power and "green" or, as she calls it, a "subversive" protest movement of the 2009 sample.

Unlike conservatives, the expert of the RAND Institute adds, the reformers studied in the West, know the West and are not very afraid of it. They are interested in business contacts with the West. They consider it extremely unreasonable to orient the Iran’s economy on Russia and China. As well as to fully rely on Moscow and Beijing as the only political and diplomatic intercessors.

Nadad believes that a nuclear transaction and the abolition of sanctions will strengthen the legitimacy of the ruling regime as a whole, and not necessarily only its reform fraction. The Iranians, they say, survived in confrontation with the outside world, and not only did they achieve the abolition of sanctions, but also forced him to recognize the legality of his nuclear developments.

The threat of an explosion of public dissatisfaction due to the extremely difficult economic situation, which was quite real a year and a half ago, was apparently lifted, and the price for this was paid not large, the expert summed up.

The Soviet regime was 70 years old, when its leaders realized the desirability of a complete change in the anti -Western course in their foreign policy. The Iranian regime according to its chronology today is located only in the middle of the path traveled by the USSR, and therefore only half is ready to retreat from a strict political and ideological confrontation with the West. This is the opinion of the analyst of the Heritage Foundation Jim Philips :

Jim Philips

- No, the Iranian regime in its evolution has not yet reached the complete restructuring of foreign policy. The speed of political transformation of the country, no matter how strange it seems, inhibits the fact that Iran is arranged less centrally than the Soviet Union. And therefore, it is more difficult for him to conduct a deep change of course than, say, Gorbachev. The Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei sees his main mission in the reconciliation of the interests of various factions in the leadership than in the promotion of new and bold initiatives. The same was his predecessor Ruhall Khomeini, who was called the "stand of the balance of political wheels." Only unlike Khamenei, who initially closely became close to Ahmadinejad and his people, and then abruptly moved away from them, the leader of the Islamic Revolution led a more skillful game and never allowed any of the factions that she could not challenge him, ”the analyst notes.

As Jim Philips noted, by and large, there are only two political factions in Iran - the Supreme Leader and all the others: in 2009, the president of Ahmadinejad accepted the proposal of Moscow regarding the fact that Iran would send the worked out atomic fuel to Russia, thus taking an important obstacle to the nuclear agreement. But Ali Khamenei will be covered by this idea, and the deal collapsed.

It is curious that the current efforts to achieve a nuclear agreement with the world powers were entrusted to the same duet Hasan Rukhani and Javad Zarif, who in 2003-2005 unsuccessfully tried to agree on nuclear issues with the European Union. After the failure of the negotiations, both fell out of disgrace, especially the core; Ahmadinejad even gave part of his associates, accusing them of espionage. It seems that in Iran they really prefer to balance the "political wheels" than to hastyly declare them hopelessly worn and throw history into a landfill.