The Islamabad talks between the United States and Iran, held at Serena Hotel, lasting 21 hours, have ended without any agreement.
US President Donald Trump has since ordered his Central Command to blockade all Iranian ports starting by Tuesday morning.
US Vice President J.D. Vance at a brief press conference said: “We need to see an affirmative commitment that [Iran] will not seek a nuclear weapon, and they will not seek the tools that would enable them to quickly achieve a nuclear weapon. That is the core goal of the president of the United States, and that’s what we’ve tried to achieve through these negotiations.” He had left his final position with Iran and it was for Iran to accept or reject it implying that America’s position was final.
Vance added that while the failure to reach an agreement in Islamabad was “bad news”, it was “bad news for Iran much more than it’s bad news for the United States of America”.
We see that for Vance the red line is that Iran should not make a nuclear weapon, and should not seek the tools that would enable them to make it. The implication is that Iran should commit to zero enrichment of uranium.
Strangely enough Iran had given that commitment during the talks held at the Embassy of Oman in Geneva on 27th February earlier this year.
Therefore, we conclude that Trump created a problem by disregarding Iran’s assurances and attacking it on 28th February.
If Trump expected Iran to go back to the position it conceded on 27th February, after six weeks of intense bombing by America and Israel, he is rather naïve. He is not the master dealer he claims to be.
Given the complexity of the issues between the two sides, did it make any sense to have a 21-hour long session?
Would it have been better if at least two or three days were allotted for a structured discussion?
Did Netanyahu ensure the collapse of the talks by phoning up Vance?
Did Netanyahu promise the support of the Jewish lobby for Vance as the next president?
Was Trump sincerely looking for a negotiated solution to the crisis he himself created?
Obviously, we need more information to answer the above questions.
But it is indeed disappointing that there seems to be no intention to give a chance to classical diplomacy. Meanwhile, we note that Iran’s foreign minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi has stated that the two sides were nearing an agreement when Netanyahu’s call came.
The Iranian delegation was led by Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, once mentioned by Trump as his choice as the supreme leader. Once again, Trump has displayed naivete. If in Iran it is known that someone is Trump’s choice for the top position, one can be certain that he won’t be appointed or elected. He might even be murdered as the spy of the Great Satan, another appellation for the U.S. in Iran.
It appears that Trump is confusing Iran with Venezuela where his public preference for a person might have worked.
It is significant that Pakistan had requested Washington to insist with Israel that Ghalibaf and foreign minister Abbas Araghchi should be taken out of Israel’s hit list. Washington must have advised Israel appropriately, but Iran and Pakistan did not want to take any chance.
One report has it that a Pakistani commercial aircraft flew alongside the Iranian plane, drawing attention on civilian radar, while the Iranian aircraft moved without standard identification signals.
Ghalibaf was earlier a commander at IRGC (Islamic Republic Guard Corps)- perhaps the only institution that has survived without much damage- and later a popular mayor of Tehran.
Abbas Araghchi had represented Iran at the 2015 JCPOA (Joint Common Plan of Action) concluded when Barack Obama was US President. That agreement provided for rigorous inspection by the Vienna-based IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) of Iran’s nuclear activities. Trump as the presidential candidate in 2016 condemned the deal saying at a rally that it would "be a totally different deal" if he won.
In short, Trump for personal interest walked out of a deal in 2018, and walked out of an even better deal in 2026, as he wanted to oblige Netanyahu who wanted to attack Iran.
Trump claimed that he has already affected a regime change and even that the new leadership is easier to get along with. Soon, true to his style, he changed his opinion on the new leadership.
Regime change means replacing regime A with regime B of one’s choice. Neither Trump nor Netanyahu will ever be able to change the regime in Iran.
It is important to figure out the background to the Islamabad talks. Of course, Pakistan was keen to mediate and host talks. Was Trump also keen? Yes, he was. Even when he was threatening to bomb Iran back to the stone age, he had asked Pakistan and China to persuade Iran to come to the negotiating table.
The story put out in the media that Pakistan has the largest Shia population outside Iran and hence it was chosen as mediator misses the point. Iran accepted America’s choice.
Iran initially insisted that before the talks started two conditions previously agreed to should be met.
First, Israel should cease attacks on Hezbollah in Lebanon. Washington denied that it had agreed to it. Pakistan made it clear that it had been agreed to.
The second condition was that America should release Iran’s frozen funds.
Neither condition was met. America asked Israel to scale down attacks on Lebanon. Netanyahu ignored.
Iran had to eat the humble pie.
However, Trump is not the only actor. The other actors are Netanyahu, Iran, China, Russia, and the GCC countries.
Trump has tweeted of his planning a blockade of the Strait of Hormuz: “I have instructed our Navy to seek and interdict every vessel in International Waters that has paid a toll to Iran. No one who pays an illegal toll will have safe passage on the high seas.”
Crucially, he also says "Other Countries will be involved with this Blockade”, without specifying who.
It is rather difficult to understand what Trump is planning. If he sends his Navy to the Strait, there will be confrontation with the IGRC. If the U.S. Navy is going to interfere with navigation south of the Strait, it is difficult to see what can be gained.
Obviously, Trump is irritated that Iran has started charging $2 million per passage. Earlier, he had said that the U.S. and Iran could jointly manage the Strait and share the gains.
Trump’s latest decision to blockade Iranian ports will have disastrous consequences. Look at the irony of it. Trump, who insisted that all ports should be open, is now wanting to close all of them.
The stock market in Seoul has fallen by 1.52 % in the first 15 minutes of trading.
Obviously, the three important actors are Netanyahu, Trump, and Iran, with China and Russia keeping a close eye, keen to jump in if necessary.
Netanyahu wants to have a longer war, if possible, till October when Israel goes to polls. Left to himself he would like to do a ‘Gaza’ in Iran, and install the son of the late Shah. He would like a ceasefire two days before the election and to project himself as the war hero to be re-elected with a clear majority.
Polls show that if an election is held tomorrow, his coalition will lose. Meanwhile, the court has accepted his request to postpone the hearing about corruption charges going back to 2019. He has been asked whether he could appear next week.
Netanyahu might intensify the attack on Hezbollah to provoke Iran. It is unlikely that Iran will be provoked into attacking Israel.
The U.S. intelligence has assessed that China is planning to send air defence to Iran. Trump has threatened to retaliate with a 50% tariff on China. Can he still go to China after imposing that tariff?
Russia is financially benefitting from the war as its oil sales have gone up.
At a deeper level with America immersed in a quagmire in West Asia, Russia and China are benefiting as the Pentagon exhausts its stock of Tomahawk, interceptors, and the rest.
The GCC has hardly any cards as Trump would have put it.
There is always a line or two from Shakespeare appropriate to recall in every situation in human life.
Epic Fury reminds one of:
“A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing"
Though not exactly nothing as one thinks of fellow human beings killed starting with the 160 school girls in Minab on 28th February.
There was a time when India under Jawaharlal Nehru contributed to conflict resolution through V.K. Krishna Menon. Where is the Vishwaguru?
Ambassador KP Fabian served in the Indian Foreign Service from 1964 to 2000. His last posting was in Rome, as Ambassador to Italy and Permanent Representative to UN Organizations including FAO (Food and Agriculture Organization), WFP (World Food Programme), and IFAD (International Fund for Agricultural Development). The views expressed here are the writer’s own.