Middle East experts analyze U.S. and Iran priorities in potential negotiations

Amna Nawaz:

For additional perspective on the state of diplomacy with Iran, we turn now to our two Iran watchers.

Alan Eyre worked at the State Department focused on Iran and he was a senior member of the Obama administration's negotiating team for the Iran nuclear deal. He's now at the Middle East Institute. And Miad Maleki was born and raised in Iran, and until last year he was associate director for sanctioned targeting in the U.S. Treasury Department with a focus on Iran. He's now a senior fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.

Welcome back to you both. Good to see you.

Miad, I will begin with you.

It looks like the U.S. delegation is set to go to Pakistan tomorrow to resume talks. The question is, will the Iranians be there? Will they show up?

Miad Maleki:

Well, based on reporting, I see Iranians are sending a delegation. That's the last reporting that I have seen coming out of Iran.

It's very obvious that they know they need a deal. They might still shout openly or through the press that they don't really need a deal, but economically and politically they really desperately need a deal right now.

Amna Nawaz:

So they're going in search of a deal. You think they're motivated to?

Miad Maleki:

They're definitely -- their economy is a collapsed, bankrupt economy. They're getting there. They have a few days before the run out of gasoline, between 12 to 20 days, if they can't import gasoline.

And last time they had to change the price on gasoline, increase the price on gasoline, they had one of the largest protests in Iran. So they know domestically they're going to have to address the state of economy.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan, did the U.S. attacking and boarding that ship, did it change leverage it all for the U.S., change how these talks could go on?

Alan Eyre, Middle East Institute:

I don't think so. I mean, it possibly increased -- it increased the possibility that the Iranians wouldn't go.

But, as Miad said, they have to show up at the table just to see what the U.S. is doing. So, again, both sides -- each side wants to enter with sort of the marginal additional leverage to increase its position. And the ship that was trying to run the blockade, I think, was testing U.S. resolve.

But, no, it didn't really move the dial out of their way in terms of what's going to happen at the table.

Amna Nawaz:

Well, you saw Liz Landers reporting earlier the president told her, if there is no deal at the end of the cease-fire, that the U.S. will resume bombing. What do you make of those threats? Do you think the U.S. will make good on them? And do they pressure Iranians to come to a deal?

Alan Eyre:

I think empirically, I have learned not to put absolute credence into President Trump's statements. A lot of them are either to assuage the market or to terrify the Iranians.

So it could well be the case that, if there's not even an interim deal that allows them to extend the cease-fire, that there could be a resumption of hostilities. But I really do think that the United States is not looking to resume hostilities and start climbing up that escalation ladder with Iran again, because Iran will retaliate against regional energy.

And it could just be painful consequences.

Amna Nawaz:

Miad, is that how the Iranians see it? Do you think those threats carry weight with the leadership there?

Miad Maleki:

You know, if I'm in Tehran, if I'm a member of this regime, I would consider President Trump's warning to be more of a real threat. I mean, historically, President Trump there are cases that he changed his mind, he gave Iranians more time.

But there are a lot of cases that you can point to that President Trump actually went ahead and stuck to his threat. So in this case, I think Iranians know that it might end up being things might end up getting worse for them on the Persian Gulf side.

But what I disagree with Alan on is that the tanker that was targeted and stopped by U.S. Navy, it does send a very strong message to the Iranians that it blockade is serious and the implication on an economic side of oil not leaving Persian Gulf and the imports fully stopped through this blockade, I think that sent very strong message to the Iranians that this is a real blockade.

Amna Nawaz:

Well, the Americans also haven't changed any of the terms or anything they're trying to push for in this deal, right? And this was the same deal both sides walked away from last time.

What are the prospects that there's some kind of successful deal if the Americans haven't changed the things they're asking for, Alan?

Alan Eyre:

Well, we don't know for certainty, or at least I don't, that they haven't changed it.

For example, President Trump at one point said we do not want any indigenous enrichment on Iran. Now that's modulated somewhat to a freeze on uranium enrichment for 20 years. The Iranians say, well, how about five years?

Yes, there's room to negotiate. A deal is doable, both on nuclear issues, on the Strait of Hormuz. But the situation is this. The more -- it's like the scale. You more you put on the scale of what I want, the more you have to put on the scale of what I'm prepared to give.

And I think this scale is where the U.S. might have some problems.

Amna Nawaz:

Where do you think the U.S. is on that part of the scale? What are they willing to give?

Alan Eyre:

I think it's possible that they're willing to unfreeze assets. I think it's possible, maybe barely possible, they'd be willing to accept downblending of highly enriched uranium, as opposed to getting rid of it all.

But things like obviously what the Iranians want, reparations, that's not going to happen. And quick and a full sanctions relief is not going to happen.

Amna Nawaz:

Miad, how do you see it? What would the Iranians agree to?

Miad Maleki:

I think Iranians would agree to anything that would give them access to some cash. That's what they're really need desperately.

Amna Nawaz:

So, the unfreezing of those funds would be key?

Miad Maleki:

I think that's what they -- they brought in -- if you look at the delegation, members of the delegation that went to Islamabad last time around from Iran, they took the Central Bank governor with them, but they didn't take any of them from the atomic energy organization.

And one of the demands was really access to those funds that are sitting in Oman, Qatar, and Iraq and elsewhere. And those are funds that they don't really need any kind of sanctions relief to be available to the regime. They just really need some letters from the U.S. government or some message or signal from the U.S. government.

So that's not a really heavy lift for U.S. government. Iranians know that, and they really need that cash right now.

Amna Nawaz:

Meanwhile, we saw the strait declared open by Iranian officials, and the next day it suddenly was not. President Trump says the blockade will also continue.

Alan, do you see another round of talks opening the strait and ending the blockade?

Alan Eyre:

No. This is -- this is their -- again, part of the pun, their trump card is control of the strait. They never opened it. Even when Araghchi said, we're going to open it, if you had read the fine print, which wasn't in the social media post, it was, if you go through Iranian waters, if you coordinate with the IRGC navy, and if you pay a toll.

So it was more a question of emphasis. And, yes, the IRGC came back later and clamped that down. But, no, the Strait of Hormuz is their most effective leverage, because every day it stays closed, its power increases.

Amna Nawaz:

Miad, how do you see it? This is a key point for President Trump. He wants that strait open.

Miad Maleki:

You know, I think this is not a trump card. It was a nuclear option for the Iranian regime, the closure of the Strait of Hormuz. They deployed it and it backlashed economically.

I think they're on the clock economically. If the blockade continues, if the Strait of Hormuz closed, they're going to see the result underground in different provinces in Iran as far as gasoline prices, food prices. I think they're just trying to wait out a few days, maybe a couple weeks to see if they can get a deal, winning the war of narrative here in the U.S. and in the West.

But at the end of the day, every time there was a U.S. escalation with Iran, whether it was some airstrikes or killing of Soleimani, IRGC commanders, Iranians always -- Iranian regime always come back to the negotiations table because they need a deal.

So they might play with the words. They might hear rhetoric coming out of Iran that don't really make sense. But at the end of the day, they desperately need a deal, and they're going to have to really give up some of those -- some of the principles they have been sticking to.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan, I will give you the last word here in the few seconds we have left. If the Strait of Hormuz is the Iranians' trump card, what's the best leverage for the U.S.?

Alan Eyre:

Well, as Miad said, the great leverage is blockading Iran. The problem is you got two clocks. And the Strait of Hormuz I'm giving pain clock is moving a lot more quickly than the naval blockade pain to Iran. Plus, Iran can take more pain. Iran is not heading into an election year.

Amna Nawaz:

Alan Eyre, Miad Maleki, great to see you both here. Thank you so much.

Miad Maleki:

Thanks.

Alan Eyre:

Thank you.