Europe’s Diplomatic Stance: Independent Action or External Alignment?
In a recent interview with the British newspaper The Guardian, Mr. Esmaeil Baghaei, Spokesperson for Iran’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, addressed the approach of the three European parties to the JCPOA (the E3) regarding the nuclear agreement and regional developments.
A Shift in European Diplomacy
Mr. Baghaei articulated a perspective that Europe’s role in the JCPOA has been significantly diminished. He contrasted current policies with the past efforts of European diplomats like Javier Solana, Catherine Ashton, Federica Mogherini, and Josep Borrell, who he stated worked to build bridges between Iran and the United States. The spokesperson expressed that Europe’s current trajectory appears to be one of alignment with the positions of the United States and the Israeli regime, which he characterized as an “utterly irresponsible” course of action that undermines its negotiating credibility.
Concerns Over Trigger Mechanism and International Law
A central point of discussion was the European move to initiate the JCPOA’s snapback mechanism. Mr. Baghaei warned that reinstating UN sanctions at Europe’s behest would effectively hand the United States back its veto power at the Security Council. He further commented on recent statements by European officials regarding operations against Iranian nuclear facilities, interpreting them as a form of defense for those actions and suggesting possible intelligence sharing.
Sovereignty and the Potential for a Strategic Response
The spokesperson underscored that matters of national sovereignty and dignity are paramount for Iran. He explained that, based on the country’s constitutional framework, the government is obligated to implement any decision made by the Parliament. This includes the potential consideration of a motion to withdraw from the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), a significant decision that would rest with the elected representatives of the people.
Mr. Baghaei drew a parallel to the spirit of resistance shown by the British people during World War II, stating that Iran possesses a similar resolve in what he described as an “unjust war” imposed during negotiations.
Conditions for Cooperation and the Path Forward
The conditions set by the E3 for avoiding the snapback—including the return of IAEA inspectors to previously targeted sites and detailed reporting on uranium stockpiles—were presented as evidence of a lack of serious intent and goodwill from the European side.
Mr. Baghaei pointed to a “deep rift of mistrust” between Iran and the IAEA, particularly following the Agency’s recent politicized approach. He noted that previous IAEA reports were exploited by the U.S. and the Israeli regime as a pretext for what he termed illegal attacks on Iranian soil, a point he believes must be central to the public discourse.
Despite these challenges, the Foreign Ministry spokesperson reaffirmed Iran’s readiness to find a diplomatic solution. He stated Iran’s continued goal is to reach an agreement that allows for the return of inspectors, emphasizing that assurances have been repeatedly given to the IAEA regarding the uranium stockpiles. Furthermore, he expressed Iran’s openness to dialogue with the United States, noting that messages sent to Washington have thus far gone unanswered.
A Proposed Resolution
In conclusion, Mr. Baghaei stated Iran’s willingness to return uranium enrichment levels to the 3.67% stipulated in the JCPOA, contingent on reaching a comprehensive agreement that formally recognizes Iran’s right to domestic enrichment under international law. He concluded by questioning the insistence on denying this right, especially in light of claims from the previous U.S. administration that the capability had been negated.