海角大神

This round of talks on Iran's nuclear program has been marked by all sides publicly setting the lowest of expectations, despite the win-win attitude following an interim deal reached in Geneva last November.

Few diplomats spoke to journalists as the second day of talks continued 鈥� and that is a good sign, say analysts. Talks are expected to wrap up聽Thursday morning, enabling European officials to deal with the crisis in Ukraine. A senior Iranian diplomat told the Monitor that the process was "moving in the right direction," but that a comprehensive deal was far from certain.

But two developments in the months since diplomats last met have put Iran on the defensive and could complicate the process, the Iranian official said: the sudden focus on Iran's ballistic missiles and US officials' portrayal of the deal as a loss for Iran 鈥� messages for domestic consumption, but problematic nonetheless.

Iran's ballistic missiles, which聽could potentially one day carry a nuclear warhead, have not been raised in two years of negotiations. But the US recently emphasized the issue聽as part of United Nations Security Council聽resolutions聽on Iran,聽which Tehran sees a possible bid to move the goalposts.

The Iranian official, who asked not to be named because talks are continuing,聽said the discussion of missiles in the context of talks to ensure Iran never has a nuclear weapon is 鈥渆xtraneous"聽and a "red line" for Iran.

鈥淚f that is the case 鈥撀爄f Iran has proved that it is not going in that direction [toward nuclear weapons] 鈥撀爓hat is the utility of talking about the missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads?鈥� he asks.

Statements from ranking Americans since the聽Nov. 24聽Geneva deal portraying Iran as losing out聽also 鈥渉ave not been helpful," he says.

He brings up comments from US Secretary of State John Kerry that there was 鈥渘o鈥� acceptance in the Geneva deal for future uranium enrichment on Iranian soil 鈥� even though it is described in the document as commensurate with Iran鈥檚 鈥渘eeds.鈥� 聽Other top US officials have stated that Iran would still suffer economically despite modest sanctions relief, or that sizable parts of Iran鈥檚 nuclear program would be 鈥渄ismantled.鈥� President Barack Obama has said repeatedly that military options remain if diplomacy fails.

鈥淲hen President Obama says 鈥榓ll options are on the table,鈥� the intention is not that important, whether he was saying it for domestic consumption, or he wanted to silence the neoconservatives, or the Israeli lobby in Washington; that is secondary,鈥� says the senior Iranian official. 鈥淭he first issue for us is that he is, somehow, using the same language as he used to do, and that cannot be acceptable for us.鈥�

As a result "We have to convince our general public and our officials that there is a benefit for Iran for the continuation of these talks, because they are asking鈥� if Americans really want to have a deal with Iran,鈥� says the Iranian official.聽

In mid-January, President Hassan Rouhani said the Geneva deal "means the surrender of big powers before the great nation of Iran." And this week Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei spoke of "the聽ugliness, the violence and terror [of] this [American] face."聽

But Iran analyst Reza Marashi cautioned that there is likely more flexibility than there seems to be.聽

鈥淎t the beginning of any negotiation you set red lines. That鈥檚 to be expected. The P5+1 and the Iranians have done it,鈥� says聽Mr. Marashi,聽the director of research for the National Iranian American Council, speaking in Vienna. 鈥淏ut they know just as well as we know that red lines become flexible lines, once the negotiations start. They have to, otherwise there is nothing to negotiate over.鈥�