A deal with Iran this week?

.

According to the New York Times, “Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who has the final word on all public matters in Iran, last week demanded that most sanctions be lifted before Tehran has dismantled part of its nuclear infrastructure and before international inspectors verify that the country is beginning to meet its commitments.”

“US Secretary of State John Kerry says the United States was prepared to ease sanctions before it fully resolves what, exactly, Iran’s nuclear scientists have been working on in secret for more than a decade.

‘We’re not fixated on Iran specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another,” Mr. Kerry said. “It’s critical to us to know that going forward, those activities have been stopped, and that we can account for that in a legitimate way.’”

So in the final days of negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program – meant to have been concluded on Tuesday but that will drag on until the end of the week- it appears to come down to this: Khamenei wants all sanctions removed immediately a deal is made; the US and its negotiating partners, the EU, Russia and China, (the latter two may not agree with the US but they are keeping quiet) want only to ease them.

The Ayotallah’s other red line is more blurred. He says that international experts should not be allowed to “interrogate” scientists or “inspect” military sites. In fact the US and its allies have only demanded “access”.

To some extent the Ayotallah is playing to his domestic audience. Or the other hand it should be possible to achieve a reasonable compromise on the sanctions issue. The negotiators could agree to allow EU, UN and Russian sanctions be lifted immediately a deal is done while the US engages in a more gradualist approach that depends on each step of the agreement being implemented. This is the only way for President Barack Obama to carry Congress with him. Public opinion will only swing to his side if this is seen clearly as America’s price for an agreement.

But what do the Iranians themselves feel? Are they behind the Ayotallah?

A new public opinion study carried out jointly by the Tehran Centre for Public Opinion Research and Iranpoll.com, an independent Canadian opinion research firm, found that two thirds of Iran’s voting public do not trust the negotiators of the US and its allies. Large majorities have negative views of the US and the UK. On China and Germany voters are divided. On Russia and France modest majorities have an unfavourable view.

Only 40% believe that the US genuinely believes that Iran is trying to acquire nuclear weapons. Asked why the US is imposing sanctions on Iran the most common answers portray the US as seeking to confront and dominate Iran. Only one in six believe that concessions would lead to a greater accommodation. (However this number is higher than a year ago and may have increased further now that a deal could be imminent.)

In other words Khamenei has the wind behind him if he decides to be intransigent.

That is the bad news. But the survey also gives a lot of good news.

A solid majority want their government to pursue a deal, but only on the understanding that sanctions be removed. Three quarters are optimistic that a deal will be made. At the same time an overwhelming majority continue to say that it is very important for Iran to have a nuclear program for peaceful purposes. Iranians believe it is necessary for assuring Iran’s future energy needs once its oil runs out and for medical purposes. (The US, under President Barack Obama, has conceded this, which his predecessors didn’t.)

Interestingly, while half of the respondents say Iran should not agree to a deal unless the US lifts its sanctions nearly as many say a deal should be made even if the US retains some sanctions provided UN, EU and Russian sanctions are lifted.

A large and growing majority of Iranians express opposition to nuclear weapons, saying that producing them is contrary to Islam- a position Khamenei has taken publically on many occasions. This is consistent with the past stance on chemical weapons. During its long war with Iraq during the 1980s (Iraq had US support and help) Iran refused to use them on religious grounds, even though it had its back against the wall.

Having come so far it should be possible for negotiators to bridge the gap. The US is unlikely to have a future president as accommodating as Obama. Iran too is unlikely to have a leader as amenable as the present president, Hassan Rouhani. As for Khamenei the negotiators should have nothing too much to fear when he preaches again and again that building nuclear weapons goes against Allah. I, for one, believe him.

Copyright: Jonathan Power.

Foreign affairs columnist, film-maker and author

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

A donors’ conference, co-sponsered by the Burundian government, the Belgian government and UNDP will be held in Brussels January 12-13, 2004. This PressInfo offers a perspective on its urgency. See also TFF’s new Burundi Forum. Imagine for a moment that politics is about goodness and generosity. Where could a few million dollars of government aid and a few civil society organisations – guaranteed – win the hearts of extremely poor millions who want peace and already work hard to achieve it after 10 years of war and genocide? The answer is Burundi, the heart-shaped country in the heart of Africa. Burundi makes a good story from Africa. But what does the world know about Burundi, its problems and struggles? Burundi’s tough reality Here are the basic facts. Burundi’s population is about 7 million and it is number 171 out of the 175 countries on the UNDP’s human development index. Their life...
Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.

Recent Articles

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Read More
Screenshot-2026-05-15-103534
Jan Oberg May 15, 2026 Go to this Fox News page and scroll the whole way down: President Donald Trump tells the world that his meeting with President Xi Jinping yielded a lot of very concrete political and economic results – of course, only where the Chinese side, according to him, agreed with him. He does not mention the Taiwan issue, but Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, says that it did not feature prominently in their talks and that the US policy on Taiwan has not changed. Then go to China Daily – or Global Times – and you will see that for the Chinese it is framework, principles, structure of cooperation etc. that matters – all embedded in the overall idea of “constructive bilateral relationship of strategic stability.” Nowhere is any concrete agreement or deal – all that Trump refers to – mentioned. At the general level, this gives you insights into the very different social...
Screenshot-2026-05-12-104023
Lena Petrova of “World Affairs In Context” with more than half a million subscribers on YouTube wanted to explore what a peace researcher like me has to say about, among other things, the First and the Second Cold War and why eethics has disappeared from politics. I am particularly happy about this conversation that also yielded an amazing number of very appreciative comments on YouTube. No doubt, people are longing for alternatives, including peace perspectives.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (2)
The MIMAC – Military-Industrial-Media-Academic Complex – drives the world’s rampant militarism and wars without end. Here is a short reflection of how it works against all interests of humanity. #5 deals with why there is no real enemy or threat images/analysis. It’s all ex-post constructions. And, btw, theTFF Peace Pulse is now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551 (1)
Jan Oberg, TFF director April 28, 2026 In this third TFF Peace Pulse, I make the important distinction between the violence and the conflict that violence is a symptom of. If you want peace, focus on the underlying conflict because that is the key to resolution, peacemaking, and a better future for the parties. The West is obsessed with violence, just look around you – and 90+ per cent of the public debate is about military issues and other violence – totally wasted for peace. These Peace Pulses will only be published here a few times. You will also not find them on YouTube and Vimeo because both platforms have blocked TFF and me; you know, peace is dangerous these days. Most TFF’s videos since 2007 are now on Rumble.
Screenshot-2026-04-13-154551
In contrast to most, we’ll bring alternatives, solutions, hope and strategies for a better future. Times are dangerous, yes, but that only intensifies the need for constructive thinking and action! Jan Oberg, TFF director April 13, 2026 The new TFF Peace Pulse uses video messages in a new way: Max 3-5-minute-long comments, ideas or perhaps mini-lectures, all about peace – positive peace. We launch them today on April 13, 2026 with a carefully crafted visual aesthetic fitting the content. We hope to publish them regularly from now on. We launch Peace Pulse (PP) – for a number of reasons. The world is in chaos, and there are countless reasons to feel concerned, frustrated, even angry. The atmosphere is saturated with doom and gloom, with negative energy and rear‑mirror thinking, while vision, imagination, alternatives, strategies and genuine future‑mindedness remain in short supply. And without them, we simply can’t save the world. Looking at problems from a hundred angles will...
IMG_5165 (1)
PART II — Publishing Peace in a System That Prioritises Militarism Jan Oberg, TFF director April 10, 2026 How TFF Maintains a Daily Voice in a Digital World Built for Noise This article is part of the series “TFF at 40″ and it invites you to learn about Four Decades of Publishing Peace. It takes a look at how a small, people‑financed peace foundation has communicated across four generations of technology — from wax stencils and fax machines to mass email and Substack — and why TFF continues to publish every single day in a system that rewards noise, conflict, and militarism. ◆ What it means to publish peace every single day in a digital system built for 24/7 news and other noise, confrontation, and militarism. How TFF’s independence, continuity, and global readership defy algorithms, donor cycles, and Western media censorhip — and why the Majority World keeps listening. When the...