Many stars have aligned to make this moment an opportune time to resolve two conflicts in the Middle East — the Syrian civil war and Iran’s march toward a nuclear weapon. A new, more moderate faction is in power in Iran, led by President Hassan Rouhani, who has vowed to break the deadlock with the West over Iran,s nuclear program. Not only does Rouhani have the support of key figures within the regime, but more important, he has the backing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
At the same time, a diplomatic settlement could materialize to end the war in Syria. Such a settlement would have to include Iran, and the outcome is likely to dispense with President Bashar al-Assad while preserving remnants of his Alawite-led regime. Key officials in the Obama administration have signaled they are willing to give Iran a role in the negotiations — something Tehran has demanded for many months. Iran views this scenario as advantageous: Even with Assad gone, Tehran would retain its footprint in Syria and its supply routes to Hezbollah, its key ally in Lebanon.
Iran could use Assad as a bargaining chip in nuclear negotiations and appear to be giving up a key weapon. Therefore, from Iran’s perspective, there are many benefits to negotiating now on the nuclear issue to try to get some of the U.S., U.N. and European Union sanctions lifted. Sanction relief is Rouhani’s top priority. Given that, Iran might agree to cap its uranium enrichment at lower levels than the current 20 percent and allow more transparency regarding its nuclear facilities and capability.
Another incentive for Iran’s leaders to make a deal is that they understand and have acknowledged their own society’s demands for sanction relief in order to improve the economy and end Iran’s isolation from the rest of the world. Khamenei, in particular, appears to have reached the realization that his survival and that of the regime depend on substantive political and economic reform.
_______________________________
To read the whole series of commentaries in Al Jazeera America, click here.
This commentary was first published in Al Jazeera America on September 24, 2013
Photo by AslanMedia via flickr
Middle East, North Africa
Many stars have aligned to make this moment an opportune time to resolve two conflicts in the Middle East — the Syrian civil war and Iran’s march toward a nuclear weapon. A new, more moderate faction is in power in Iran, led by President Hassan Rouhani, who has vowed to break the deadlock with the West over Iran,s nuclear program. Not only does Rouhani have the support of key figures within the regime, but more important, he has the backing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
At the same time, a diplomatic settlement could materialize to end the war in Syria. Such a settlement would have to include Iran, and the outcome is likely to dispense with President Bashar al-Assad while preserving remnants of his Alawite-led regime. Key officials in the Obama administration have signaled they are willing to give Iran a role in the negotiations — something Tehran has demanded for many months. Iran views this scenario as advantageous: Even with Assad gone, Tehran would retain its footprint in Syria and its supply routes to Hezbollah, its key ally in Lebanon.
Iran could use Assad as a bargaining chip in nuclear negotiations and appear to be giving up a key weapon. Therefore, from Iran’s perspective, there are many benefits to negotiating now on the nuclear issue to try to get some of the U.S., U.N. and European Union sanctions lifted. Sanction relief is Rouhani’s top priority. Given that, Iran might agree to cap its uranium enrichment at lower levels than the current 20 percent and allow more transparency regarding its nuclear facilities and capability.
Another incentive for Iran’s leaders to make a deal is that they understand and have acknowledged their own society’s demands for sanction relief in order to improve the economy and end Iran’s isolation from the rest of the world. Khamenei, in particular, appears to have reached the realization that his survival and that of the regime depend on substantive political and economic reform.
_______________________________
To read the whole series of commentaries in Al Jazeera America, click here.
This commentary was first published in Al Jazeera America on September 24, 2013
Photo by AslanMedia via flickr
Recent & Related
Made in the Gulf, Designed in America: How the Iran War Has Incentivized Drone Production in the GCC
The Orphan of the Summit of the Future: The Declaration on Future Generations
Experts React: Takeaways from the Trump-Xi Summit
Kabuki Diplomacy Between US and Iran at UNGA
Is the Iran War Worth It? Six Months Later, Still No
Why Iran-Backed Iraqi Armed Groups Are Hedging on Disarmament
9 Issues to Watch at UNGA 81
Why the Houthi Capture of Mocha Matters Far Beyond Yemen
Nuclear Disruption: The US-Saudi 123 Agreement and the Future of Nuclear Cooperation in the Middle East
The Nation Is Not Alone. We Need Reflexive Multilateralism
“No, History Begins Today”: Why Washington Could Not Reshape Pakistan’s Interests After 9/11
What if the US Had Made Peace With Iran After 9/11?
Find an Expert
Home to more than 100 scholars and global affiliates, the Stimson Center is proud to be a magnet for the world’s leading experts on the most pressing foreign policy and national security issues of our time. Explore our experts and their work.