Egypt Hosting Iran-P5+1 Nuclear Talks, No Impact on Tehran-Cairo Relations

What characteristics should the host of nuclear negotiations have?

Basically, when a news topic is important, any issue that is related to this news becomes sensitive. The fact is that the venue of Iran-P5+1 negotiations is not a determining factor and does not have a significant impact on negotiations. But politically, if the country which hosts such an important meeting helps them to reach an agreement or solve the problem, it will certainly be considered as a positive point in the international arena. But it does not make any difference for either of the parties (Iran and the P5+1) whether these negotiations are held in Moscow, Ankara, Cairo, or Baghdad. The major issue for both parties is for the host to be able to manage the negotiations and engage in political bargaining within the framework of their demands.

On what basis are the cities which host these negotiations selected?

The normal process is that both parties agree on it but each with its own outlook. But, for example, a city like Geneva in Switzerland is the center of international organizations and automatically has the necessary means to hold such meetings including accessibility of hotels and security of the meeting place. Geneva is a city which has successfully held international conferences numerous times. But when, for example, a meeting is held in Baghdad, the issue of the security of the place and sufficient access to the media are effective elements. The Iranian delegation recently stated that the venue of negotiations must be a country which, at least, does not have an open and direct position or has not taken any measure against Iran. Therefore, if the negotiation is to take place in Paris or London, Iran has no readiness to accept it.

Is Egypt an appropriate option to hold this meeting?

The new Egypt is gradually proving itself in the international scene. The present Egypt is different from Egypt during Mubarak’s presidency. The fact that these negotiations are going to be held in Cairo or Sharm-al-Sheikh (for Sharm-al-Sheikh has precedence in holding several international conferences) is perhaps due to the fact that Iran's view is that it will be able to replace Turkey whose relations with Iran are not proper due to their differences of opinion over the issue of Syria. Perhaps the hope is that this issue will help relations between Iran and Egypt to expand. Of course I believe that this is not possible. Nevertheless, the reasons behind Egypt's caution in expanding its relations with Iran are something else. But this is a positive point for the Egyptians to hold the Iran-P5+1 negotiations. 

If supposedly we decide to hold these negotiations in a European country, which countries, based on the elements that you mentioned, would be proper options to hold them?

It seems that the positions of the European countries with regard to Iran are not different from each other. The atmosphere which is created in relations between Iran and the EU is not healthy due to numerous reasons. But in general it is not significantly important which European capital hosts this negotiation. But those cities in Europe which are experienced in holding international meetings or for example Vienna in Austria are more suitable to hold this meeting. But I, once again, repeat that the venue of these negotiations does not impact its outcome.

Is it possible that holding such a meeting in Egypt will impact relations between the two countries?

Egypt's hosting of these negotiations is a positive point for this country. But perhaps it would have been more logical if Iran had reiterated that this issue would result in the improvement of relations between Iran and Egypt. But the fact is that at the present time Tehran-Cairo relations have not improved due to other reasons unrelated to these negotiations which would need to be explained perhaps in another interview. Assuming that holding such a meeting in Egypt would improve relations between Iran and Egypt is not based on facts.