Iran tries to cosy up to Europe to increase pressure on US | Iran

IIranian foreign minister Abbas Araghchi is briefing European capitals on the nature of the offer he intends to make at weekend talks in Islamabad on Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and the future management of the Strait of Hormuz, in a move designed to increase pressure on the United States to make concessions in its conflict with his country.

After the inconclusive talks, Araghchi held telephone briefings with the French and German foreign ministers Jean-Noël Barrot and Johann Wadephul, as well as the Saudi, Omani and Qatari foreign ministers.

It is understood that Iran emphasized that it did not see the Pakistan-led process as exhausted even after 21 hours of intense talks.

Europe has been sidelined by Donald Trump on the Iran dossier for more than a year as the US president focuses on working with Israel; Tehran, for its part, largely rejected European governments and saw them as stubborn creatures of America. But signs of a deepening transatlantic divide and intense pressure on European economies have led Iran to reconsider its stance on Europe as potential leverage over Trump.

In some deference to Trump’s demand for military support for his war, European countries have focused on forming a defensive, non-belligerent naval alliance to control freedom of navigation in the Strait of Hormuz only after the conflict ends. The plan requires sensitive discussions about rules of engagement, likely to be drawn from the EU’s experience fending off the Houthis in the Red Sea during Operation Aspides.

French President Emmanuel Macron announced that a new joint conference will be held with the British to discuss the proposal with the allies; this was the third such meeting since the initiative was launched. Any plan would need to be discussed with Tehran, including a plan to implement tolls.

Trita Parsi, director of the Quincy Institute, said: “Presumably the Iranians will see whether it is possible to best move the Europeans in their direction compared to where they were before, which from the Iranian perspective was too subservient to the United States, and if not, they will see whether there is a deeper division in Europe where not all states have to follow the line set by Germany, France or Britain.

“The Iranians in particular are trying to quickly establish this mechanism for relatively low tolls and get as many countries as possible to accept it.”

In the short term, Iran will urge countries with minesweeper equipment (Germany, Britain and Italy) to resist pressure from Washington to start clearing mines in the strait, as Tehran will see this as an action supporting Trump’s illegal blockade of Iranian oil ports.

Removing largely unmapped mines could be dangerous in a harmless and peaceful environment, but could be even more concerning if the operation is being conducted under attack from Iranian drones. British ministers said that the issue of Iranian mines will be discussed at the French-British conference.

In the case of Italy, Trump’s attack on the pope and the defeat of Viktor Orbán in Hungary make the acquiescence of populist right-wing Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni to US pressure politically fraught. His close relationship with Trump and his support for Israel are faltering.

Tehran did not express a definitive opinion on the Franco-British initiative; partly because it is still unclear what this initiative involves or what Iran’s long-term plan for the strait will entail (including which ships will pay on what legal basis, at what price, or in what currency).

The bill before the Iranian parliament proposes that the new tolls be applied to all commercial traffic, not just oil tankers. It is possible that the country may request payments in cryptocurrency as a way to avoid US sanctions. The Strait of Hormuz alone accounts for 11 percent of global maritime trade and one-third of oil transported by sea.

Malley said he did not think the toll system would be sustainable, but added: “Iran has discovered a new method of deterrence that is more effective than obtaining a nuclear bomb, and that is to close the Strait of Hormuz.” The United Kingdom insisted that freedom of navigation meant freedom of navigation.

Last year, Araghchi was highly critical of Europe’s refusal to stand up to Trump when the E3 powers (France, Germany and Britain) allowed the reimposition of UN sanctions over Iran’s alleged failure to meet commitments on access to its nuclear facilities.

But Iran’s foreign ministry has watched as divisions between Trump and Europe grow in the Middle East, the United States’ commitment to NATO and whether Israel should join a ceasefire by ending its attacks on Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, as Iran has demanded.

Iran feels a strong obligation to protect Hezbollah from Israeli attacks, and EU Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said it was vital that the war in Lebanon was included in any ceasefire talks. The crisis has cost 22 billion euros in rising fossil fuel energy bills, it said on Monday.

Regarding Iran’s nuclear program, senior officials have emphasized that the country is willing to demonstrate its good faith by diluting its stockpile of highly enriched uranium rather than transferring it to a third party. Deputy speaker of Iran’s parliament, Ali Nikzad, said: “The Islamic republic was ready to dilute – not transfer – 450 kg of enriched uranium to prove its good faith.”

He added: “A consortium for dilution was to be formed with the participation of Iran, the United States and Saudi Arabia, but they backed out of this agreement.”

But European diplomats said it remained a puzzle how to persuade Iran to compromise on its nuclear program, including a long-term pause on its domestic enrichment program, at a time when Iran has no way of ensuring that U.S. sanctions relief will be permanent. Some diplomats have argued that the strait could be offered as a legitimate source of revenue or compensation if the United States resists sanctions relief.

Nitya Labh, a fellow at Chatham House’s international security program, argued that a new regime for the strait may need to be developed, adding: “Iran should be a party to any agreement regarding the strait.”

This would likely require easing structural sanctions and managing the strait, he wrote. Joint verification of transit and maritime escort of ships throughout the region involving Iran and other regional partners is likely. He acknowledged that bringing Iran into a structured framework that includes specific maritime proposals and new multinational coordination would not be a quick fix but would be the basis of stability.

Labh said: “A future agreement must go further and define not only the nuclear restrictions Iran will accept, but also the political and economic relationship it will gain in return. It must do so in concrete enough terms to garner domestic support from all parties.”

More generally, there is a mood in Europe to be more assertive towards Trump; even if this risks undermining their grand bargain with Trump over support for Ukraine. Sophia Besch, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said it was in Europe’s interest to be more critical of US behavior in Iran. He said: “If we want to maintain the tolerant consensus on the rearmament of Europe, if we want to keep voters on board with all this money we devote to our defence, we cannot pursue military adventurism and one-sided wars.”