Importance of Sherman’s Remarks

-Before we attempt to analyze the recent statements made by Mrs. Sherman, we must take note of the fact that if the other side makes a statement which is to our benefit, we should not maneuver on it inside the country so much and cause the domestic radicals to mobilize against it.

-If these recent statements are not intelligently dealt with, the US radicals will certainly exert pressures on the US administration to take back their statements. Therefore, we must deal with this issue with wisdom and intelligence and prudence so that its reality is not erased.

-These statements could be analyzed from several aspects; the most important aspect is the place where it was said. Mrs. Sherman went to Israel following the first round of negotiations for a final and comprehensive agreement between Iran and the P5+1 and stated in front of Israeli journalists that, in the final agreement, Iran’s right to enrichment will be recognized.

-On this ground, aside from the fact that the statement made by the US Under Secretary of State is important by itself, its significance increases since she has made this statement inside Israel.

-The second point is that, although what has been stated by Mrs. Sherman is a new issue for its approach, it is not a new issue in its context for it is exactly the same as the agreement which was reached between Iran and the P5+1 in Geneva in the Joint Plan of Action.

-This issue is mentioned in the introduction of the Joint Plan of Action stating that the objective of these negotiations is to reach a comprehensive and long-term agreement in order to guarantee that Iran’s nuclear program will remain completely peaceful. This comprehensive agreement will enable Iran to enjoy its rights in using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. This comprehensive solution guarantees an enrichment program with a common definition.

-This is the same issue that Iran’s negotiating team referred to many times following the Geneva Agreement, stating that Iran’s enrichment right has been recognized, but the radicals inside Iran did not believe this.

-The third point about Mrs. Sherman’s statements is related to the other part of her speech in Israel when she said that the US, like Israel, would have preferred if Iran would not be able pursue the enrichment program, but this is an impossible expectation.

-The Islamic Republic of Iran has technologically reached a stage in its nuclear program that enrichment has become an undeniable fact at this stage and Iran can no longer be deprived of this right. Iran’s nuclear negotiating team has participated in these negotiations with this fact and they have, many times, stated that enrichment is Iran’s red line.

-The fourth point is that these statements made by Mrs. Sherman prove the claim that the US intends to peacefully resolve the nuclear issue through diplomatic means.

-The Obama administration has risked its reputation to resolve Iran’s nuclear issue and has entered into a dispute with senators and representatives of the US House of Representatives and threatened them to veto any new sanction against Iran.

-That is why Obama is interested to succeed in resolving an issue on which his predecessors had failed and gain concessions for himself and his party in this regard.

-I hope that the critics will criticize more fairly and take note of the fact that national interests should be preferred over partisan interests.

-The critics must consider the conditions the country was in before the election and where it stands after the election where the new administration has brought back Iran’s reputation. If priorities are set based on national interests, then the successes of a government which is affiliated to another group should be recognized, but unfortunately it seems that what has, hitherto, been ignored in the criticisms have been the national interests of Iran.