Big hopes rest on Iran-West nuclear deal
The nuclear deal between the West and Iran deserves to be welcomed, but with cautious optimism. The agreement is temporary in nature and extends for a period of six months. To that extent, it is work-in-progress and just an interim step towards a final deal. There is much that can go wrong in this period and, therefore, it is best not to uncork the champagne bottles yet. Having said this, it must still be acknowledged that the deal is indeed a major diplomatic breakthrough. Over the past 10 years, Western and Iranian negotiators have met several times to discuss Tehran's controversial nuclear programme and each time they have walked away from the table in frustration and acrimony.
That they have now been able to come to some sort of an agreement — no matter how temporary and fragile — shows that the West, represented by the P5+1 nations (the US, UK, Russia, France, Germany and China), and Iran are finally being able to overcome decades of mutual suspicion and distrust. Much of the deal is based on good faith, which is also what makes it risky and open to criticism. The agreement requires Iran to slow down its nuclear programme in return for the West lifting part of its economic sanctions. More specifically, Iran has agreed to neutralise its nuclear stockpile that has been enriched to 20 per cent, halt all enrichment activity for above five per cent and also dismantle technical connections that make possible enrichment activities. Additionally, it has also allowed the International Atomic Energy Agency unprecedented access to its nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow, so that the global watchdog can ensure that Iran holds its side of the promise. On its part, the West will be loosening the sanctions regime ever-so-slightly — just enough to allow about six to seven billion dollars (most of it frozen oil revenue) to flow into the Iranian economy. While this is not a lot of money, it will allow Tehran breathing space. Critics argue that the Ayatollahs will abuse this opportunity to accelerate the nuclear programme. There are no guarantees against such a situation, but the fact that such mischief will lead to more punishing sanctions should act as a restraining force.
Western sanctions have already crippled the Iranian economy. President Hassan Rouhani was in fact voted to power earlier this year primarily because he promised to work with the West and revive the economy. To that end, it can be argued that, though his boss Ayatollah Ali Khameini will have the final say on the matter, the President himself has a personal stake in making the deal, which he effectively initiated, work. The same can also be said of his American counterpart Barack Obama; he has withstood enormous pressure from the powerful Saudi and Israeli lobbies in Washington, DC, to push through this effort. In the process, Mr Obama has also staked his already battle-worn foreign policy credentials on the deal. While it is too early to decide if the agreement will work, there is one positive takeaway regardless of the final outcome: The deal is proof of the West's official acknowledgement of Iran's right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in keeping with the latter’s international obligations — a position that India has espoused for decades.