If things go as planned and the US and Iran sign an agreement aimed at ending hostilities on Friday, negotiators from the two bitter rivals will face the complex task of untangling half a century of deep-seated problems against a backdrop of suspicion, hostility and broken trust – all in 60 days.
It’s likely that this two-month window would need to be extended. The issues remain highly complex and could require specialists with profound technical expertise across military strategy, international law, economic sanctions, and nuclear technology.
Negotiators will need to reach agreements on demining the Strait of Hormuz, the legality and implementation of sanctions waivers, the destination of frozen Iranian assets, monitoring and restricting Iran’s nuclear program in cooperation with the UN’s atomic watchdog, limits on uranium enrichment, and extracting highly enriched uranium buried in Iranian soil.
Beyond regional mediators, who have proven apt at brokering peace agreements, Washington and Tehran may also need to set aside their differences with other major powers like European nations, China, and Russia, to use their specialized expertise and technical capabilities required to resolve these issues.
All of this has to unfold against the backdrop of fierce pressure opposing a deal from key allies like Israel to hardline factions in Iran and even critics in Washington.
And unlike the 2015 nuclear agreement, which took nearly two years of meticulous negotiations by the Obama administration and five other major powers (backed by teams of nuclear experts and Iran analysts) – this time the shadow of a devastating war looms large, one that claimed the life of Iran’s most revered leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
More importantly, both sides must shape an agreement that, from the outset, appears fundamentally different from the 2015 deal to persuade the American president that it is markedly superior to its predecessor, which he has repeatedly branded “one of the worst deals ever made.”