Negotiations between Iran and the six international mediators (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) to resolve the dispute over the Iranian nuclear program have entered the final stage.

       The Rossiya Segodnya Press Center hosted a round table on the topic: “Iranian Nuclear Talks: Success or Failure?”

       The parties are expected to approve a political framework by March 30 and to coordinate the technical details and sign the final document guaranteeing the peaceful development of the Iranian nuclear industry in exchange for the lifting of sanctions by late June.

       The round table was attended by Vladimir Yevseyev, Head of the Caucasus section at the CIS Institute and a Valdai Club expert.

       Yevseyev believes that so far there is no cause to expect a breakthrough in the negotiations. Among the reasons why an agreement will not be signed with Iran – at least on the US terms – is the election of Mohammad Yazdi, an opponent of rapprochement with the West, as head of the Assembly of Experts. The deal also has many opponents in the Majlis, the Revolutionary Guards, and other influential organizations.

       On the other hand, both President Barack Obama and President Hassan Rouhani have a vested interest in signing a framework agreement despite the powerful pressure both face at home. In the United States in particular there is a fierce standoff between the Congress and President Obama.

       As Yevseyev noted, recently 47 Republican senators wrote an open letter to the Iranian leadership – an extraordinary step condemned by the US elite – warning them that they “will consider any agreement regarding your nuclear-weapons program that is not approved by the Congress as nothing more than an executive agreement between President Obama and Ayatollah Khamenei. The next president could revoke such an executive agreement with the stroke of a pen…” It should be mentioned that the letter was addressed to no one in particular, which in Iran is perceived as an insult.

       Vladimir Yevseyev doubts that Obama will go all the way and risk a confrontation with the Congress considering that he needs its cooperation on healthcare reform, at least two more budgets, and other things.

       He believes the US president has very little flexibility to reach a compromise with Iran. Obama could offer an agreement on American terms, but it’s clear (including to the Iranians) that the US ability to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem by force is limited. It’s not in America’s interests to start a war with Iran, which would be sheer madness amid the deepening Ukrainian crisis.

       Vladimir Yevseyev also focused on the economic situation in Iran. The economy is in really bad shape on account of several factors. Oil exports have fallen from 2 million barrels a day in 2011 to 1.4 million in 2015 against the background of plummeting prices. According to World Bank estimates, Iran earned a mere $23 billion (at $40 a barrel) in January 2015 as compared with $120 billion in 2011.

       Previously Iran could partially offset the shortfall caused by Western sanctions by exporting oil to Iraq, but exports to Iraq have been curtailed. Iran is attempting to create a system of gas pipelines to Iraq, with the first such pipeline scheduled to open in April and the next one in fall. Both are main trunk lines, a sign that the volumes will be considerable. Yevseyev thinks this will compensate for the dip in Iran-Iraq trade to some extent.

       Coming back to the potential agreement, Yevseyev said that it would recognize Iran’s right to enrich uranium, albeit with restrictions on 5% enrichment lasting potentially for 10 years. The number of operating centrifuges would also be cut from 9,000 to 6,000 and the research reactor at Arak would be repurposed so that it wouldn’t produce more than one kilo of weapon-grade plutonium a year.

       The two countries are so far unable to come to terms because Iran is unwilling to close its uranium enrichment facilities. There are also serious differences on the lifting of sanctions. Iran wants a phased process. Europe, unlike the US, is open to lifting the sanctions in stages.

       What options does Obama have? He can reduce the financial restrictions, which means relaxing enforcement for companies, primarily European ones, operating in Iran. They will no longer be hit with US sanctions, which would go a long way towards enabling Europeans to work in Iran while the sanctions are only partially lifted.

       Yevseyev believes that the lifting of sanctions may take between 10 and 15 years, because the US wants 10 years of strict IAEA inspections plus 5 more years of less onerous inspections. He is certain that the United States will lose its economic leadership by 2025. China will become the uncontested leader and, in all likelihood, will begin reshaping the world financial system.

       Since the sanctions relief will come slowly and the majority of sanctions regarding the nuclear program will remain in place forever, this would open up new opportunities for Russia. Given that the signing of a comprehensive agreement is not on the cards, the parties can settle for a framework deal. Under these circumstances, Russia will have an opportunity to expand its cooperation with Iran.

       Trade between Russia and Iran amounted to less than one billion dollars last year, which is a small sum for two big countries. Russia has been working on a project to build two new nuclear plants at Bushehr. The feasibility study will be completed in August. Work on yet another nuclear plant is likely to start in fall, with Russia actively recruiting Iranian subcontractors.

       Another project with good prospects is modernizing Iranian railways, and Russia is ready to lend a hand.

       We are also on the threshold of a rapid expansion of military cooperation (not to be confused with military-technical cooperation) in the naval, air force, and air defense areas.

       In conclusion, Yevseyev noted that the relaxation of unilateral sanctions was possible, but the sanctions imposed by the UN Security Council would remain in place for lack of consensus among the permanent members.

       Views expressed are of individual Members and Contributors, rather than the Club's, unless explicitly stated otherwise.