AS Pakistani mediators are working hard to bridge gaps between the United States and Iran vis-à-vis their positions on issues involved, Washington reacted cautiously to the latest offer of Tehran saying President Donald Trump was ‘unhappy’ with the proposal as it does not address Iran’s nuclear programme.
At the same time, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, on Monday acknowledged that Iran was “serious” about reaching a deal with the United States, but any agreement must prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon.
It is significant to note that the reaction given by the United States after President Trump consulted his security aides on the Iranian proposal means Washington has not rejected outright the proposed plan and some sort of understanding can be developed in the days to come as Pakistan and several other countries have become active to facilitate and encourage the de-escalation process between the two countries. It is logical not to expect a broad agreement encompassing all aspects of the conflict between the United States and Iran as there are fundamental differences on the nuclear issue. It is because of the sensitivities of the two sides and high stakes that Iran wants the nuclear issue to be discussed at a later stage. Its position becomes understandable as the US/Israeli invasion of the country has strengthened calls for a nuclear deterrence and it will be difficult for the leadership in Tehran to accept the US demand for abandoning the nuclear option at a time when the atmosphere is highly charged over concerns to national security and sovereignty. Reopening of Strait of Hormuz is also a demand and urgent requirement of the international community as well because double blockade (Iranian restrictions and American naval blockade) has put enormous strains on the global economy as underlined by a sharp rise in prices of oil and gas. Therefore, the two countries must agree to lift their blockades and allow commercial ships to navigate without any threat or hindrance. There is nothing officially on record but reports quoting credible sources say Iran wants joint control of the Hormuz along with Oman and there are also suggestions to include more countries in the mechanism for management of the channel. This has also been confirmed by the Iranian Foreign Minister who said “Safe passage through the Strait of Hormuz is an important and global issue, and we and Oman, as two countries overlooking this strait, need to have close coordination to ensure common interests. In any action taken in this regard, the interests of Iran and Oman are directly involved”.
The Minister, while commenting on his recent diplomatic engagements in Oman, Pakistan and Russia also said that he held ‘good consultations with friends in Pakistan’ and that his trip was very successful. Apparently, his visit to Russia was also successful as the Minister received assurances from President Putin that his country “will do everything that serves your interests and the interests of all the peoples of the region to ensure that peace is achieved as quickly as possible”. In fact, the statements and moves emanating from Tehran and Washington have become a war of nerves between the warring parties, impeding prospects for an early understanding on contentious issues. In a related development, Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said they had no intention of lifting their blockade, which has roiled energy markets. The Guards said on their official Telegram channel “Controlling the Strait of Hormuz and maintaining the shadow of its deterrent effects over America and the White House’s supporters in the region is the definitive strategy of Islamic Iran”. On the other hand, Americans believe their military strikes and now naval blockade have worsened economic conditions in Iran forcing its leaders to seek peace. The war of words notwithstanding, there is expectation that the two sides would reach an interim understanding as resumption of war will harm their interests badly.
