An Iranian view of negotiations and possible war
Looking for clues in an NPR interview.
On today’s Morning Edition, we interviewed a participant in the U.S. talks with Iran: Majid Takht-Ravanchi, Iran’s vice foreign minister. Interviews with all sides of a story like this really matter. Nobody tells you everything, but you can listen carefully to what everyone says and leaves unsaid. Often you find clues, and I would expect that analysts will look for clues in this interview.
Takht-Ravanchi expects to attend Thursday’s talks with the United States in Geneva. He expects the talks to follow the same format as an earlier round: Indirect negotiations with messages passed through Oman’s foreign minister, followed by a face to face handshake at the end.
Q. Are you close to an agreement?
“We are ready to reach an agreement as soon as possible. We want to do whatever is necessary to make it happen.” He adds, “I believe the deal can be reached as soon as possible.” Independent analysts have cast doubt on the possibility of successful talks. Iran has been notably more optimistic in its public statements, leading to some speculation as to why. Skeptics have suggested Iran may be seeking to appear reasonable so that any U.S. attack would appear unjustified.
Q. Iran is making a proposal. Does it concern anything other than Iran’s nuclear program?
“No, the subject of negotiations is the nuclear issue, and this is agreed by all sides.” Nothing on missiles or other Iranian assets. Talkht-Ravanchi describes talks much narrower than hardliners in the US and Israel would like. They want Iran to give up its whole nuclear program, its ballistic missiles, and its partnerships with groups such as Hezbollah. Here’s one such voice, Mark Dubowitz, as heard on NPR.
Q. How would Iran respond to a limited attack?
“You cannot contain the war which is going to be started. How can one... end the war with just one strike?” He added, “The whole region will suffer as a result of aggression against Iran.” Asked directly if this means Iran would attack its oil-producing neighbors, Takht-Ravanchi denied it but added, “If the US attacks Iran, how can anybody expect Iran to be silent? We have to respond to US assets in the region.”
There is a reason that I asked about a “limited” attack. Reporting out of the US suggests that one of President Trump’s options would be a limited strike to push Iran to concede more in negotiations. Iran has insisted that it would regard any attack, even a small one, as an existential threat. That implies they might make a massive response, unlike with prior strikes by the U.S. and Israel. Analysts are divided as to whether Iran would do that.
We also asked the vice foreign minister about the aftermath of Iran’s protests, in which thousands of people were killed. An Iranian told NPR of a move to search students in schools for pellet wounds or other signs they had been present for protests. Here is the underlying story.
We’ll continue listening to all sides as the U.S. prepares for negotiations—and also deploys assets that could launch a major war that, so far, has spurred no formal debate in Congress nor received that much public attention.