Rifts between EU, US over Iran not strategic, rather tactical

To learn more about this, our correspondent conducted an exclusive interview with Senior Political Analyst and Expert Sadeq Maleki.

Following is the full text of Maleki's interview with Mehr News:

As the first question, would you mind explaining the main objective of US President Donald Trump about Iran’s nuclear deal?

In response to your question, I should say that election of Trump as the President of the United States can be considered as a disaster for both America and international body. Today, it is a matter of regret to say that a person who is suffering from psychological problem has assumed power as president of the United States of America. Therefore, he should be dealt with cautiously. In the Middle East politics, Trump is a merchant and businessperson working for Tel Aviv and Riyadh. Over the course of a decade of tough negotiation over Iran’s nuclear standoff, rationality of Iranian nuclear negotiating team led to the implementation of Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) with collective wisdom.

In an idealistic point of view, although JCPOA was not ideal for the Islamic Iran, it has been a troubleshooter to move the country out of serious crisis in certain conditions. Today, Trump’s activities and behaviors show that Iran’s nuclear deal dubbed “JCPOA” has been carried out in proper time and conditions. Currently, adhering and living up to commitments within the framework of JCPOA has been turned into a nightmare for Trump but he cannot do anything in this respect. Although JCPOA is a multilateral and international agreement, the role of the United States has been more prominent than others. It should be kept in mind that despite Trump’s opposition to JCPOA, he has not yet succeeded in lifting the deal.  
 
Is there any trust to US and Trump that JCPOA cannot be lifted?

Trust in America is naive. Negotiations over JCPOA have been done neither based on trust nor trust-building goal. These negotiations have their own defining framework, so that JCPOA has been implemented in this regard.

With regard to Trump, we should not worry, so that lifting JCPOA by the US government is possible but it will be very difficult for this country and can jeopardize its prestige in international arena severely. As mentioned in above, if JCPOA is abolished, US prestige will be marred in international level and this country will sustain irreparable damage in international community as well.

If JCPOA is lifted by US government unilaterally, the gap, which is created as a result of lifting JCPOA, will pave suitable ways for other parties involved in the deal to resume their activities with Iran. That is to say that if US withdraws from JCPOA, Iran’s status will be improved in international arena in return. In the meantime, lifting JCPOA by the US government will increase unity and amity among Iranians and such bullying behavior, breaching commitments and oppression of US government against people of our country will have a special meaning in the culture of Iranians.

To what extent Iran can rely on its relationship with Europe and US?

In response to your question, I should say that interests should be secured in the scene of politics. The disagreements between Europe and US over Iran are not strategic, rather, it is tactical.

But in the arena of politics, these tactical discrepancies and differences are often created an opportunity. For this purpose, some major European firms will consider their interests with US more than that of investing in Iran. Under such circumstances, some major European companies prefer to consider more investment in US than Iran. It should be kept in mind that if a crisis is spread with relation to Iran, Europe’s stance will be at serious stake than US. Therefore, security implication of nuclear crisis and its marginal issues have been focused by the European countries.

In the meantime, it should be kept in mind that the difference between Brussels and Washington is more focused on the nuclear field and JCPOA in particular. It should be noted that Europe and United States have the same opinion with regard to the human rights charges and Iranophobia provocations caused by the missile power of Iran. Even, Europe can even be pioneer in exertion of severe human rights’ pressures to Iran in this respect.

Considering the performance of regional countries especially with regard to supporting terrorist groups like ISIL (DAESH), is a serious crisis predictable between Tehran and Washington during Trump presidency?

It is difficult to foresee the upcoming future especially in the Middle East region which is passing through important developments but transient. Risk of waging war with Iran will be very costly for the United States. The challenge between Iran and United States is not merely related to nuclear issue. United States is at loggerhead with Iran’s independent approach in the global arena. US government does not want Iran to be a model country for others and for this reason, it fears to wage war against Iran. US government knows very well that Iranian government and its people have modern and realistic approach, history of which dates back to many years ago and has a wide gap with tribal, ethnic and religious systems of the region. Meanwhile, thousands of people from countries which are claimant of secularism and also NATO member states have joined DAESH (Persian acronym for the Islamic State in Iraq and Levant, ISIL) terrorist groups. Iran and Iranians have been at the forefront in fighting terrorists and terrorism. The US government’s accusations against Iran are the result of political and economic considerations.

Regarding its accessibility to information and also its experience of waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq, Washington knows very well that Iran’s performance in dealing with terrorism is not comparable with the US allies in the region at all.

Interview by: Payman Yazdani