Brief respite

Considering the years of bitter dispute over Tehran's nuclear program, the statement made by Iran's chief negotiator Saeed Jalili was rather extraordinary: the Geneva talks were good and paved the way for even better negotiations, he said. That's an encouraging summary which exceeded expectations.

Although the US was for the first time fully participating in the international talks with Iran, hopes of making progress at this first meeting in over a year had not been high.

On the contrary, tensions appeared to be mounting in recent days: Iran announced the construction of a second uranium enrichment plant and carried out provocative missile tests.

This, combined with Iran's disputed election in June, did not bode well for US President Barack Obama's offer to enter into direct negotiations with Tehran.

It would appear though that the talks in Geneva have proved the pessimists wrong: the parties agreed to further talks in late October, and a series of positive steps are to be taken in the run-up to that meeting.

For instance, the inspectors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) are to be admitted to the new uranium enrichment plant, and Iran will send any already enriched uranium to Russia for processing.

If Iran sticks to these commitments, it would prove all those wrong who in recent days advocated a tougher policy toward Tehran, including additional sanctions. This mainly applies to the Europeans.

The Russians and Chinese had been reserved or dismissive, and President Obama had stressed that he did not want to withdraw his offer of dialogue for the time being. He reiterated this stance after the Geneva talks, but also said he now expected true cooperation from Tehran.

Iran appears willing enough to comply – at least for now. However, in the past Tehran has repeatedly shown more flexibility when an ultimatum was about to expire.

The world powers had agreed to wait until the end of September and then decide on concrete measures. But for now negotiations will continue, and Iran has gained a respite without having changed its previous policy in the least.

However, this is just one way to see it. Another view is – and this may well prevail – that threats and sanctions achieve less than open and honest negotiations on equal terms.

The Europeans will probably have to acknowledge that Obama's offer of dialogue was the better policy. This policy is not restricted to Iran's nuclear ambitions; it also aims at improved relations with Tehran in other areas.

There are more than enough reasons to follow up on this and various problems that need to be resolved – not just between Tehran and Washington. It's been 30 years since Iran's revolution and it's about time to address these issues.

Author: Peter Philipp/nk
Editor: Nancy Isenson