What now after the collapse in peace talks between America and Iran in Pakistan? The gap between the two sides on the two critical issues – Iran’s nuclear program and the Strait of Hormuz – proved too big in the end. Is it back to war? What does the failure to reach a deal mean for the fragile, two-week ceasefire the two sides agreed? Whose fault is it that the discussions, which lasted for a marathon 21 hours, broke down? So far, there is little in the way of concrete facts about what exactly happened in Islamabad but the blame game is already under way.
First out of the blocks was J.D. Vance, who led the American side. He said the US had given the Iranian regime its “final and best offer” but to no avail. The Vice President revealed that he had spoken to Donald Trump “a half dozen times, a dozen times” during the negotiations – the highest-level talks between US and Iranian officials since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Vance also remained in touch with other members of the administration including Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Vance was sanguine about the failure to reach a deal, saying that “it’s bad news for Iran, much more than it’s bad news for the United States of America” and that he believed the US had been “flexible.” When pressed further on why he had decided to walk away from Islamabad, he said the Americans had not heard an “affirmative commitment that they will not seek a nuclear weapon.” The nuclear issue and Tehran’s claim to have a “right” to uranium enrichment was always going to be a major stumbling block. No real surprise that this has proven to be the case. Vance suggested the door remained open for Tehran but warned that the US would not change its stance. He did not answer a question about whether the US was going back to war, nor did he offer any answer on what the breakdown in talks meant for the ceasefire.
Iran has its own version of events. It blamed America’s “unreasonable demands” for the collapse in negotiations. “Repeated US demands derailed progress at every stage,” it claimed. Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei said the two sides had “reached understandings on two or three key issues” but didn’t specify what these were. “Diplomacy never ends,” he added. Much of this should be taken with a pinch of salt. The Iranians would appear to have yielded little of substance in these negotiations but it serves Tehran’s interests to keep some form of dialogue open, if only to play for time.
So far, there is little in the way of concrete facts about what happened but the blame game is already under way
The harsh reality is that there is still too much of a gap on issues of substance between the two sides. This makes a successful negotiated outcome to this conflict something of a stretch. President Trump appears to be in no mood to yield ground. He told reporters yesterday that it “made no difference” to him if there was a deal or not. He added: “The reason is because we’ve won.” Trump has always framed the Islamabad talks in blunt terms, saying Iran had “no cards” beyond its ability to disrupt shipping. American forces are now reportedly beginning the process of clearing the Strait of Hormuz to allow for safe passage of shipping. That hasn’t gone down well in Tehran. The Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps have threatened to deal “severely” with any military vessels transiting the waterway. Compromise appears as far away as ever. The Tehran regime, mistakenly or otherwise, still thinks it has time on its side and is in no hurry to make concessions.
Are there any grounds for optimism? Well, the collapse of negotiations in Islamabad doesn’t necessarily mean that diplomacy has reached an end. After all, both sides finally managed to get together in the same room to talk. They may not have seen eye to eye but have at least exchanged detailed proposals – even ones that looked impossible a week ago. The ceasefire is still holding – so far at least. Diplomacy and peace might still have a chance, even if the window is now narrower than ever. Still, no one should hold their breath.
Comments