Potkin Azarmehr writes a guest analysis for EA:


“Relations with the US and negotiating with that country, except in specific cases, will have no benefit to the Islamic Republic, but rather will be harmful….Interaction and talks with Americans have absolutely no impact on reducing their hostility and are useless too. Which wise person will pursue what is self harming?” , the Supreme Leader told Iranian ambassadors and Foreign Ministry employees last week.

It is clear that Ayatollah Khamenei is averse to any rapprochement between Iran and the US, but feels compelled to do so in “specific cases”. One such “specific case” was the nuclear negotiations, where Iran’s imploding economy and the imperative for Iran to have the current sanctions lifted has pushed it to the negotiating tables.

Economists — as well as Iranian figures like Speaker of Parliament Ali Larijani — argue that sanctions have contributed at most to 20% of the Islamic Republic’s current economic problems, and that the root cause is the mismanagement, corruption, and cronyism in the Iranian system. Nevertheless if Tehran’s economy is going to have any chance of a breather, sanctions must be lifted as a first step forward.

So why did the Supreme Leader put the spanner in the wheel by unleashing his unhelpful comments as he formally backed Iran’s negotiating team?

The answer lies in a belief that maybe a comprehensive nuclear deal is not necessary to break the sanctions. Behind that belief is a four-prong strategy.

The first prong is Iran’s attempt to win the international public opinion. That tactic explains the paradox where, in a country that limits social media and threatens those who use it with punishment, Foreign Minister Zarif posts on Facebook and President Rouhani’s staff — and those of the Supreme Leader — are busy putting out messages on Twitter. There are also the articles and interviews in Western media by Zarif and Rouhani, as well as supporters in the West, some guided by a directive of the Foreign Ministry .

The second prong is to project the idea that businesses are flocking back to Iran and anyone who does not will miss the gravy boat. To achieve this desired effect, Iran has disseminated suspect news such as the claim that a California-based energy company signed a deal worth $1.17 billion with Tehran for the use of renewable energies. Iranian representatives abroad are making their sales pitches with Western businessmen and MPs, while foreign delegations have travelled to Iran to assess the market situation and build their lists of contacts.

The third prong is to divide the European Union and the US. The line is that, when the sanctions are lifted, the US will have the lion’s share of business, with only small crumbs left for Europe, so best to act now before the Americans seize all the opportunities and profits.

A meeting between the Spanish ambassador in Tehran and Rouhani’s advisor Mohammad Ali Najafi, highly publicized on the President’s official website, was only one example of the approach. According to the site, the Ambassador declared, “Sanctions against Iran not only troublesome but illogical too….Many other EU countries also want an end to sanctions against Iran.”

Last and not least, Iran is having a good deal of success in lifting sanctions against its companies in the European courts. Tehran and its lawyers, realizing that European Governments can not provide European Union judges with evidence because it would compromise their intelligence sources, are winning case after case.

This strategy has not meant that Iran wanted to collapse the nuclear negotiations. To the contrary, the extension of interim arrangements from July to November has given the Islamic Republic more time to develop its strategy.

However, the further the strategy advances, the less the need for Iran to make concessions. And at some point, the Islamic Republic may be able to consider walking away from table.

Which brings us back to the Supreme Leader’s statement last week — in condemning the discussions with the US as “useless”, does he believe Iran is on the point of making that walk-out and pursuing his “resistance economy”?