Why Iran is seeking nuclear negotiations now

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh

Iran’s recent announcement of nuclear negotiations with the E3 – comprising France, Germany, and the United Kingdom – scheduled for January 13, 2025, marks a significant shift in its diplomatic strategy. This sudden move has raised questions about Tehran’s motivations. Several factors likely contribute to this decision, including the return of Donald Trump to the US presidency, increasing threats of Israeli military action, setbacks to Iran’s nuclear program, and mounting economic challenges. Together, these dynamics create a context in which Iran seeks to avoid confrontation, relieve economic pressure, and strengthen its international standing.

Trump’s upcoming inauguration on January 20, 2025, has undoubtedly sent ripples through Tehran’s leadership. During his first term, Trump withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018, a landmark nuclear deal negotiated by the Obama Administration. He then launched the “maximum pressure” campaign, a strategy aimed at crippling Iran’s economy through sweeping sanctions. This campaign targeted Iran’s oil exports, financial transactions, and access to international markets, leaving the country economically isolated.

Under “maximum pressure,” Iran faced a near-total collapse of its oil revenues, with exports plummeting from over 2.5 million barrels per day in 2018 to less than 300,000 barrels per day at certain points. The Iranian rial lost significant value, inflation skyrocketed, and the population endured acute hardships. The policy also curtailed Iran’s ability to fund its regional proxies, such as Hezbollah and other proxies, weakening its influence in the Middle East.

Tehran is keenly aware that Trump’s return to office likely means a resumption, if not an escalation, of this approach. Seeking nuclear negotiations with the E3 before January 20 could be a preemptive attempt to deter Trump from reimposing devastating sanctions. By signaling a willingness to negotiate, Iran may hope to create a rift between the United States and its European allies, who have traditionally preferred diplomacy over punitive measures. Additionally, any progress in talks could provide Iran with diplomatic leverage to counter the impending onslaught of American pressure.

While the return of Trump looms large, Iran also faces immediate threats from Israel. For years, Israeli leaders have voiced alarm over Iran’s nuclear advancements, asserting that Tehran is perilously close to crossing the nuclear threshold – the point at which it could produce a weapon. Israeli officials have signaled that they would not hesitate to take military action to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities. Recent developments have heightened these tensions. Among the most significant was a strike on a critical nuclear research center. While Tehran has downplayed the impact of such attacks, it is plausible that its nuclear ambitions have been temporarily derailed.

Iran’s move to the negotiating table may thus be a calculated effort to stave off an Israeli attack. By engaging in talks and signaling a willingness to compromise, Tehran can create a diplomatic shield, reducing the justification for preemptive strikes. Moreover, Israel’s threats of action are likely to carry greater weight if Iran remains isolated and confrontational. A cooperative posture in negotiations could, at the very least, buy Tehran more time to recalibrate its nuclear strategy.

In addition, Iran’s economy is in a precarious state, and its leadership is acutely aware that the country’s survival depends on economic stability. Years of sanctions, coupled with domestic corruption and mismanagement, have left the Iranian economy in tatters. Today, inflation continues to erode the purchasing power of ordinary Iranians, while unemployment remains high, particularly among the youth. The government most likely recognizes that its grip on power could weaken if these economic conditions persist.

Negotiations with the E3 offer Iran a lifeline. Even the partial lifting of sanctions could provide access to frozen assets abroad, allow for the resumption of oil exports, and open up international trade channels. By pursuing talks, Tehran hopes to secure enough economic breathing room.

Engaging the E3 specifically – rather than negotiating directly with the United States –appears to be a tactical move. The European powers have consistently favored a diplomatic approach to resolving the nuclear standoff and have been critical of both Iran’s nuclear advances and Trump’s maximum pressure campaign. By reaching out to Europe, Tehran aims to position itself as a reasonable actor willing to compromise.

The timing of these talks is also significant. As Trump prepares to take office, Iran likely believes that demonstrating progress with the E3 will create divisions within the Western alliance. A unified front of Europe and the United States has historically been more effective in exerting pressure on Tehran. If Iran can drive a wedge between them, it might secure more favorable terms in any future agreement. Additionally, European nations could act as intermediaries, advocating for Iran’s interests in broader international forums and potentially softening the impact of US policies.

In conclusion, Iran’s decision to engage in nuclear negotiations at this critical juncture is best understood as a tactical move aimed at preserving its government and avoiding a multi-front confrontation. By reaching out to the E3, Tehran seeks to preempt the resumption of Trump’s maximum pressure campaign, deter Israeli military strikes, and secure much-needed economic relief.

Courtesy: alarabiya