Iranian analyst: For a fair offer, Iran will compromise on its nuclear program

[azurnoir]

This assessment was made in late August by Ali [an alias], a 35-year-old Iranian analyst, who divides his time between Tehran and Germany. Ali wears many hats. He is a researcher for a respectable magazine, he used to work with the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and he also runs some charity projects. Although he is on good terms with some of the highest-ranking Iranian officials, he himself is not a part of the regime, and is quite critical of its internal and foreign policies, including its political repression. Ali has studied and worked in the United States, written about Iranian foreign relations, and doesn’t lead a religious life.

Ali, what is the impact of sanctions on the Iranians?

The sanctions are having two major effects. Firstly, on the psychological level, people are much less confident about the future of the economy, there are less investments, and as a result there is an economic recession. People prefer to invest in assets which are not controlled by the government – namely foreign currency, gold and real estate – and not in the local currency or local goods. All this has brought about an unprecedented devaluation of the currency, which has lost around 50-60% of its value in the past year alone. The government still has large reserves of foreign currency, but it keeps them for later stages, assuming we are in for a marathon, not a short crisis.

In any case, as a result of this devaluation, all imported products have become much more expensive, doubling their cost within the past 9-10 months. This has many indirect consequences. For example, livestock feed, based primarily on corn, which Iran now finds it hard to purchase due to the sanctions. This has driven the prices of all livestock-based products upward, such as dairy, poultry and meat. These prices have doubled in the past year. We felt this very distinctly during Eid El-Fitr.

In fact, the main reason for the change in prices is not the sanctions, but the cutting of government subsidies on various products. A few years ago, the government began implementing the most far-reaching economic reforms in the history of Iran. They stopped subsidizing numerous products, including staple-diet items, energy and services. This was done quite abruptly, perhaps too abruptly. As compensation, the government gives people money, and thus inflation is rising. This, in turn, reduces public confidence in the future, and the economy is affected negatively yet again, creating a vicious circle. However, the sanctions enable the government to blame the economic crisis on something imposed from the outside, and blur-out the real reason for inflation, namely its failed economic policy.

http://972mag.com/iranian-analyst-for-a-fair-offer-iran-will-compromise-on-nuclear-project/55878/

[bananas]

1. "There are people in Iran who would profit from an attack, even though no one would admit it."

There are people in Iran who would profit from an attack, even though no one would admit it. In such a scenario, Iran will have the most legitimacy to develop nuclear weapons. The experience of other countries shows that going nuclear is followed by 10-15 years of isolation, and in the end everyone gets used to it, and life goes on. Secondly, as we all know, it strengthens the government and distracts public opinion from the political situation. War is always a unifying factor, and it helps to make people forget about economic hardship, as is the case with Israel.

<snip>

That’s the new Iranian strategy, in order to improve their standing at the negotiations. (Former President) Khatami thought of striking a deal with the Europeans at the time, but he was in for a disappointment. He froze the uranium enrichment program for two years unconditionally, a complete freeze as a confidence-building measure. And then, after that loss of time and money, the Europeans told him they wanted a permanent freeze. Khatami was humiliated, and was perceived as naïve in Iran. Following this big disappointment, they shifted to a different strategy of establishing facts on the ground.

<snip>

The nuclear program began with less than 200 centrifuges at one site, and today there are two facilities with more than 10,000 of them. We already have 5-6 tons of the lowest level enriched uranium, and around 150 kg of the higher level material. Therefore, they are no longer discussing 3.5 percent enrichment with the West, but 20 percent, which proves that their strategy was right, and facts on the ground do change your opening position when you negotiate. Today the negotiations cannot go back to zero per cent enrichment. There’s a new era. Even an attack will not eliminate the nuclear program, because in spite of the delays, we can always rebuild it.

Where this leads to: they have enrichment facilities, delivery systems, and all the other elements needed to make nuclear weapons, and they realize their negotiating position will improve even further if they go ahead and build a few of them. Gradually they wind up like us with thousands of nuclear weapons we don't know how to get rid of.

[bemildred]

2. We don't want to resolve the issue, we want a change of government.

We find the nuclear issue convenient to use for bringing that about, just like in Iraq.

[hrmjustin]

3. We will bomb sometime after the election. Gas prices will prevent it before the election.

I hope that Labor wins in Israel next year.