The release of hostages in Iran and the future of the nuclear deal – Sanam Vakil

The expected release on March 16 of Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Anoosheh Ashoori, two people with dual British and Iranian citizenship who had been detained for years in Iran, is a constructive turning point in relations between London and Tehran. The result was achieved thanks to the tireless work behind the scenes of lawyers and officials, progress in the Vienna nuclear talks, support from the Omani government and an international public opinion campaign.

However, despite this breakthrough, some sensitive issues remain pending between Iran and the UK. Last but not least, the fear that by repaying its forty-year debt of 400 million pounds (477 million euros) to Iran, the equivalent of an advance paid by Tehran in the 1970s for a delivery of tanks which was then suspended, the British government could justify the taking of hostages by Iran. This is why ever since Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s arrest in 2016 the London government has been rightly reluctant to establish a connection between the prospect of his release and the payment of the debt.

In 2016, US President Barack Obama was heavily criticized for repaying $ 400 million to Tehran in similar circumstances after the release of four people with dual US and Iranian citizenship. To comply with regulations on sanctions, counter-terrorism and money laundering, and to avoid giving the same negative image as Obama, the British Foreign Office has announced that the debt money has been blocked and will only be used for humanitarian purposes.

a limbo
However, hostage-taking remains an open question. At the moment, the British Foreign Office advises those with double British and Iranian passports not to go to Iran, where two people are still detained: Mehran Raoof was sentenced to ten years in prison on national security charges, while the Environmental activist Morad Tahbaz, who also has US citizenship, has been given permission to release from prison but not to leave Iran. For now, Tahbaz appears to be treated as a US detainee by the Iranian government. His case, together with those of Siamak and Baquer Namazi and Emad Sharghi, remains in limbo and is linked to the outcome of the ongoing nuclear negotiations between the United States and Iran. The Biden administration returned to the negotiating table in April 2021, paving the way for the small advances that played a role in the liberation of Ashoori and Zaghari-Ratcliffe.

These talks contain the key to Iran’s future on the international stage and to the continuation of its nuclear program. The UK’s debt repayment was further delayed by the Trump administration’s 2018 withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran (the JCPO), accompanied by increased pressure from sanctions on Iran. However, despite Trump’s withdrawal from the agreement and the consequent acceleration given by Tehran to nuclear power, which reduced the Iranian nuclear “waiting time” from a year to a few months, the United Kingdom, France and Germany they worked to hold together what was effectively an effective multilateral arrangement during Trump’s difficult years.

The end is near
After eleven months of negotiations, the end of the nuclear talks can be seen, but there are some last-minute problems to be resolved. Much of the sanctions imposed on Iran during the Trump administration are expected to be lifted in exchange for Tehran’s return within the limits set in 2015 with the first agreement. Most importantly, Iran’s program would again be supervised and monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (Aiea). Last week, Russia, which had hitherto been a constructive player in the negotiations, sought to sabotage its progress by asking for written guarantees to protect its participation in the agreement from the sanctions imposed for the attack on Ukraine. The issue was resolved when the Biden administration gave Moscow the necessary guarantees to protect its cooperation and support for the agreement from war sanctions.

In this final phase, Tehran needs to clarify some issues: it is trying to obtain more precise economic guarantees to protect the Jcpoa in the event that a future US president decides to withdraw from the agreement again, in addition to the removal of the Revolutionary Guards from the list of groups US terrorists. These are not simple concessions for Washington. The republican opposition to the JCPOA and the criticism of the negotiations conducted with Tehran in a delicate election year continue to tie Biden’s hands and prevent him from making important concessions. For the United States, the United Kingdom and Europe it will be difficult to underestimate the blatant missile attack launched between 12 and 13 March by the Revolutionary Guards, the armed wing of the Islamic Republic, on Erbil, Iraq.

To reach an agreement, all parties involved will have to carefully evaluate the progress made against the growing risks of a collapse. In a scenario without an agreement, Tehran would certainly give a further acceleration to its nuclear program and increase regional tensions, especially with Israel. The Gulf countries are also concerned that Iran’s regional activities may get out of control. The UAE and Saudi Arabia, in particular, are vulnerable to missile attacks launched by Iranian-backed Houthis in Yemen. Whether there is an agreement or not, the fragile dynamics of regional security require attention and support from the international community.

The liberation of Zaghari-Ratcliffe and Ashoori is an important turning point in relations between the United Kingdom and Iran, but the solution is still far away.

(Translation by Giusy Muzzopappa)