As the negotiations in Vienna proceed and Western delegations seem unsatisfied with Iran’s positions, talks of war and striking Iran’s nuclear facilities have become increasingly loud and ever-present. While the US states it is negotiating in good faith and seeking to revive the nuclear deal, talk of war with Iran has become a pro forma part of almost every US government address, statement, or press release on the matter of the talks. Needless to say, this rhetoric is significantly deteriorating the already hostile and dire environment in which the talks are currently taking place.
Obviously, one reason for this rhetoric is the psychological war element against Iran. Some sanctions scholars have argued that where sanctions are effective, it is often because they are a stalking horse for military action[1]. Iranian officials, however, seem unlikely to make concessions over such threats. From the Iranian standpoint, threats of war have become a permanent fixture of the US approach to Iran, and making concessions against it will only enhance its perceived usefulness. Additionally, the most likely possibility of war is an Israeli attack that draws in American support. Considering Israel’s certain opposition to any deal, it is hard to say whether agreeing to American demands in Vienna would neutralize that threat.
Click Here to Read the Entire Paper
OPINION PAPER | Threats of War and the Vienna Talks — @AliAhmadi_Iran
For the entire paper ⬇️ https://t.co/1ocCVsJoDU pic.twitter.com/5wFKpfHaD6
— Vocal Europe (@thevocaleurope) January 12, 2022
_______________________________________
[1] Pape, R. A. (1997). Why economic sanctions do not work. International security, 22(2), 90-136.
