Matthew Bunn: Iran-US agreement takes into account European concerns

Matthew Bunn, Professor of Foreign Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School says the snapback mechanism will end, but many of the other restrictions have longer durations or are indefinite – including Iran’s commitment not to build nuclear weapons.

News ID: 5862

Date: 25 January 2025 - 15:57

TEHRAN-TABNAK, Jan 25: Matthew Bunn, Professor of Foreign Policy at the Harvard Kennedy School says the snapback mechanism will end, but many of the other restrictions have longer durations or are indefinite – including Iran’s commitment not to build nuclear weapons.

“I very much doubt there will be any US-Iran agreement that does not address European concerns and the concerns of other parties in the Middle East as well,” Former adviser to the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy told TABNAK News Agency.

Following is the full text of the interview.

Q: IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi, has considered negotiations between Iran and the United States essential to resolve the nuclear issue. What is your assessment of his words?

A: I believe Director-General Grossi understands that Iran is not likely to agree to be fully open in resolving the issues with the IAEA relating to uranium contamination at locations Iran had not declared unless Iran sees progress on the broader nuclear and sanctions issues, which is unlikely to occur without talks with the United States.

Q: In general, why has Grossi entered such an issue? Is this issue defined as one of his duties?

A: Director-General Grossi has been trying to convince Iran to comply fully with its legal obligations in its IAEA safeguards agreement.  That is absolutely defined as one of his duties – and he sees that Iran is not likely to agree to do so without progress in US-Iran talks on broader issues.

Q: António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, said at the Davos summit, “Iran must make it clear once and for all that it will stop having nuclear weapons.” These statements come at a time when Grossi said at the same summit that we have no evidence of nuclear weapons production in Iran. In fact, Guterres is accusing Iran while Grossi, as the Director General of the institution responsible for verification in this regard, denies it. What is the reason for Guterres' words?

A: I believe this may be a translation issue.  Multiple news sources I’ve seen quote him as saying: “"Here my hope is that the Iranians understand that it is important to once and for all make it clear that they will renounce to have nuclear weapons, at the same time that they engage constructively with the other countries of the region."  “Renounce to have” would mean “commit that they will not have in the future” – essentially, Iran’s legal obligation in the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty “not to manufacture or otherwise acquire” nuclear weapons.   As a number of Iranian officials have made clear in public statements, Iran has developed all the technologies it needs to produce nuclear weapons.  That fact has raised international concerns.  If Iran hopes to get relief from sanctions the United States and others have imposed, it will have to help reassure the international community, with more than words, that it is not going to head toward making nuclear weapons.

Q: US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has supported the ‘Snapback’ mechanism. We are about 8 months away from October 2025, when the restrictions on Iran in the JCPOA will end. If the US is seeking an agreement with Iran, why is it raising such a statement? Is it being raised as a leverage of pressure?

A: The snapback mechanism will end, but many of the other restrictions have longer durations or are indefinite – including Iran’s commitment not to build nuclear weapons.  I cannot speak for Secretary Rubio, but the Trump administration has made clear that they believe pressure will be needed to convince Iran to agree to terms they are seeking.  The difficult question is whether Iran and the United States will be able to overcome the distrust and hostility on both sides to reach an accord that would serve both sides’ national interests, including lifting many of the sanctions on Iran.

Q: If Iran and the US reach an agreement, what will be the reaction of Europe? Some believe that if the E3’s concerns are not met in the Iran-US agreement, they may use the ‘Snapback’ mechanism as a lever to disrupt the Iran-US agreement. Do you agree with this argument?

A: I very much doubt there will be any US-Iran agreement that does not address European concerns and the concerns of other parties in the Middle East as well.