"The US and Iran were talking past each other, with Washington insisting Iran must abandon its capacity to develop a nuclear weapon, while Tehran maintained it has the right to a civilian nuclear programme."
"The US vice-president's final offer required Iran to give up its nuclear capacity entirely, resembling an imposition of victory rather than a basis for negotiation."
"Given the gap between the two sides, the positions were never likely to be reconciled in a single round of negotiations, resulting in talks without trust and a war without resolution."
"A deal between Iran and America, however imperfect, would leave the world better off than continued conflict, as fighting is destructive, unpredictable, and costly."
The US and Iran's diplomatic talks ended without agreement, as their positions were irreconcilable. The US demanded Iran abandon its nuclear capabilities, while Iran insisted on its right to a civilian nuclear program. The US also sought free passage through the strait of Hormuz, while Iran wanted control and sanctions lifted. The lack of trust and differing priorities led to a stalemate, emphasizing the importance of negotiation to avoid destructive conflict. A deal, despite imperfections, would be preferable to ongoing war.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]