America and Iran will meet in Oman today on the nuclear deal. Where both the parties can explore the possibility of an agreement through direct or indirect communication. This meeting is not just a diplomatic conversation between two countries, but can be a step that will impact the security, energy market, global economy and geopolitics of the entire West Asia.
Relations between Iran and America have been filled with stories of tension, distrust and conflict for decades. The Islamic Revolution of 1979, the occupation of the American embassy, the stringent sanctions imposed on Iran, the controversy over the nuclear program and the ongoing proxy conflict in West Asia, all these never allowed the two countries to move openly towards normal relations.
The question is, what do the US and Iran really want from each other amid the current tense environment, and what role will a small but diplomatically active country like Oman play in this? Come, let us try to understand.
After all, what does America want from Iran?
First of all, it is important to know what America ultimately wants from Iran? According to some facts that are coming to light, America wants concrete assurances from Iran on many issues. If this does not happen, there is a possibility of tension between the two. These issues are as follows.
1- Iran’s nuclear program is America’s biggest concern.
America’s biggest concern is Iran’s nuclear program. Washington wants Iran to limit uranium enrichment to reduce the possibility of it reaching weapons grade. America wants to give comprehensive inspection powers to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), so that the possibility of any secret site or hidden program is reduced. Revival of an agreement like the 2015 JCPOA in a revised or new form may also be on the US agenda, but this time with more stringent conditions and longer-term controls.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Khamenei and US President Donald Trump.
2- Iran’s regional policy is also a challenge
For America, not only the nuclear issue but also Iran’s regional policy is a challenge. Hezbollah in Lebanon, Houthi in Yemen, Iran-backed militias in Iraq and Syria, Washington sees all of them as Iranian networks that threaten US interests and its allies, especially Israel, Saudi Arabia, UAE etc. The US wants Iran to reduce military and financial support to these groups, or at least to stop attacks that target US bases, ships or allies.
3- Oil and gas supply should not stop.
America also wants maritime security and stability of global oil supply. The Strait of Hormuz is one of the world’s most important oil and gas supply lines. America fears that if the tension increases, Iran may adopt a strategy of stopping ships, seizing tankers or carrying out attacks. Washington wants Iran to at least guarantee that international sea routes will remain open, so that the supply of oil and gas to global markets is not disrupted.
4- Progress on the issue of hostages and prisoners
From time to time, there have been cases of arrest of citizens of each other or persons having dual citizenship between the two countries. America wants a humanitarian settlement to be reached for those American citizens or Western passport holders held in Iran on espionage or security charges. Sometimes agreements like prisoner exchange are part of a broader diplomatic package, which may also be on the agenda in this meeting.
5- Some diplomatic success under electoral and domestic political pressure
The American leadership often conducts foreign policy keeping domestic politics in mind. Any kind of limited agreement, such as a prisoner exchange, a temporary nuclear freeze or a de-escalation mechanism, allows the US administration to say that it has achieved success through diplomacy while avoiding war.
What does Iran want?
The US-led sanctions have had a huge impact on Iran’s economy. Ban or heavy restrictions on oil exports, control on banking channels, obstruction in dollar based transactions, all these have increased the economic pressure on the common people of Iran. In such a situation, Iran also has some expectations.
Oil is Iran’s natural treasure
1- Iran wants this
Tehran wants at least enough relief to sell oil openly, gain some access to the international payment system and attract foreign investment. Iran’s experience has been that even after previous agreements, many companies do not invest in Iran due to fear of American pressure or secondary sanctions, so this time it does not want paper relief but wants concessions that can have an impact on the ground.
2- Guarantee of security and reduction in fear of regime change.
Tehran has long believed that America’s true intention was to topple the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran wants the US to at least publicly withdraw from the policy of regime change and give security assurances that it will not try to change the regime through military attacks or covert operations. Such a de-escalation arrangement also provides stability and legitimacy to the Iranian leadership internally.
Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (Photo- Khamenei)
3- Acceptance of regional influence
Iran believes that its influence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen is not just interference, but part of its security. Tehran wants America to accept this influence as ground reality at some level, rather than considering it completely illegal. Even if America does not accept it directly, at least there should be so much agreement that the policy of immediately targeting Iran-backed forces will be softened and the channel of dialogue will remain open.
4- Diplomatic victory for internal politics
Even within Iran, there is an ongoing conflict between hard-line and relatively liberal, pragmatic factions. If any agreement is seen to be made on terms of respect and equality, then the ruling establishment can present it to the public as providing relief without bowing down to its opponents. This gives the government some political space amid domestic discontent, inflation, unemployment and social tensions.
Why is Oman’s role important?
Oman has been playing the role of quiet mediator in the region for a long time. Neither is Saudi in direct competition with Iran, nor does Israel appear to be openly on one side of the Palestine conflict. Even before the 2015 nuclear deal, many secret Iran-US talks took place in Muscat, the capital of Oman.
Oman in the meeting between the two countries Playing the role of mediator.
For Oman, this role is a symbol of its diplomatic credibility and balance. He maintains good relations with America, so that he can be confident that the talks will not go against his interests. At the same time, it also maintains respectful relations with Iran, so that Tehran feels that its security concerns and dignity are also being taken care of.
Challenges and wall of distrust
Although the meeting in Oman may provide hope, some fundamental difficulties also lie ahead. Iran feels that America can withdraw from any agreement at any time. The United States believes that Iran can continue its nuclear and missile programs through covert channels and can formally deny it while carrying out attacks through proxy groups.
There are political groups in both countries that consider any kind of agreement as weakness. They may try to sabotage the diplomatic process, either through media rhetoric or by exerting pressure in Parliament/Congress.
Concerns of regional allies
Israel, Saudi Arabia and some Gulf countries may fear that if America is soft on Iran, their security interests will be ignored. On the other hand, Iran is worried that America will continue its strategy of encircling its neighboring countries through security agreements.
Trying to balance between confrontation and dialogue
The proposed Iran-US meeting in Oman opens a window of hope in the current tense environment. The goals of the two countries are different, but there is also some common ground. America wants to control nuclear and security concerns while avoiding war. Iran wants economic relief, political security and informal recognition of its regional influence. This conversation taking place on the soil of Oman may also be an attempt to strike a delicate balance between confrontation and dialogue rather than a major historical turning point, but considering the current situation in West Asia, this effort is also very important.