TABNAK reached out to Mark Fitzpatrick, who was Executive Director of the IISS Americas office and head of the Non-Proliferation and Nuclear Policy Programme untile 2019 to shed more light on on the recent developments around the possible Iran-US agreement mediated by Pakistan.
Following is the full text of the interview:
There is some optimism about a potential preliminary agreement between Iran and the United States. Notably, both the American and Iranian sides have expressed optimism about it. What is your assessment of this situation?
I believe the optimism is warranted. President Trump is ready to make significant concessions in order to open the Strait of Hormuz to relieve the pressure on global oil prices. Focusing only on the maritime issue for the time being is an extraordinary turnaround in his position. It underscores his disastrous decision to start this war. But ending the destruction and opening the waterway is now his least bad option.
In recent days, Arab leaders and Turkish officials have spoken with Trump regarding an agreement with Iran and have emphasized the necessity of reaching a deal. Do these contacts have an impact on Trump's approach toward whether to reach an agreement or not?
Yes, but not because of their rhetorical powers of persuasion. It’s because they have been moving away from the US and closer to Iran. The strategic power balance is tipping against the United States. Also, the reluctance of [persian] Gulf Arab states to allow use of their airspace and bases for continued bombing constrained Trump’s options.
Some speak of disagreements between Israel and the United States regarding an agreement with Iran. Another argument rejects this disagreement, considering it superficial. Do you think this disagreement is serious?
The disagreement is real and serious. Blaming Netanyahu for encouraging him to start the war, Trump is now treating the Israeli leader like a punished child, saying Netanyahu “will do whatever I want.” The draft peace deal would see Netanyahu achieving none of his objectives. As reported in the press, there would be no permanent end to Iran’s nuclear weapons capabilities, no limits on Iran’s missile program and no constraints on Iran’s support for “proxy” forces in the region.
Figures such as Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State during Trump's first term, have stated that the agreement the US will reach with Iran resembles the Obama administration's deal. He has touched on Trump's Achilles' heel, which was met with a strong reaction from the White House. Accordingly, if an agreement is signed with Iran, how will the hardliners in the US, particularly Republicans like Lindsey Graham, confront Trump?
Notwithstanding the tragedy of the unnecessary war and the troubles it has wrought, I am watching the reactions of Pompeo and others with a sense of schadenfreude. Lindsey Graham is tying himself into knots, as it were, criticizing the reported deal on Saturday then on Sunday praising Trump for a “brilliant proposal” about expanding the Abraham accords as a tangent to the deal.
If an agreement is signed between the US and Iran, what will Israel's approach be? Given that if Netanyahu wants to destroy it, Trump might undermine his position in Israel and support his rivals. Trump's comment about having 99% support in Israel and even being able to become a candidate for Prime Minister of Israel seems to be an implicit message to Netanyahu. What is your assessment?
Since the details about enrichment and sanctions are still to be finalized, Israel will do all it can to influence Trump to bargain for the strongest, longest-lasting suspension, while accepting the reality of the situation. Again, I feel schadenfreude at seeing Netanyahu outmaneuvered. Meanwhile, he will seek to maintain Israel’s ties to Arab states and expand the Abraham Accord. I don’t see Trump trying to interfere in Israeli politics. His talk about himself becoming candidate for Israeli Prime Minister is just typical Trump baloney.
