Iran Seeks Economic Rewards in New Nuclear Talks
Talks have gained ground as both sides weigh the possibility of reviving elements of the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action , abandoned by former President Donald Trump in 2018. Iranian authorities now argue that a stronger, longer-lasting deal would require tangible economic benefits for Tehran, in addition to nuclear restrictions that satisfy American and allied security concerns. According to officials familiar with the matter, Iran's message to the US administration is clear: mutual concessions must deliver measurable gains, particularly in trade and investment.
Iran's approach reflects a broader strategy to demonstrate that its economy, despite layers of sanctions, holds untapped potential. Senior figures in Tehran have underscored that easing punitive measures could unlock access to energy resources, manufacturing opportunities, and regional markets. By promoting its market to the US, Iran is trying to reshape the negotiating framework, focusing not only on sanctions relief but also on future economic cooperation.
Washington, however, remains cautious. While US officials acknowledge the diplomatic shift, they insist that Iran must first meet strict verification standards regarding its nuclear activities. Talks led by Special Envoy for Iran Robert Malley have stressed that compliance with the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards remains non-negotiable. Analysts note that although the economic overture is novel, it may not easily sway sceptical factions in the US Congress, where any new agreement could face intense scrutiny.
See also OPEC+ Faces Internal Strain as Oil Price War Looms
Iran's pitch is bolstered by subtle changes within its economy. Over the past five years, despite facing significant hurdles, Iran has made strides in reducing its dependence on oil exports by fostering domestic industries and diversifying trade relationships, particularly with Asia and parts of Africa. Government figures claim that sectors such as petrochemicals, pharmaceuticals, and mining have expanded, creating a foundation for future growth if international barriers are lifted. Economists caution, though, that structural challenges persist, including inflation, unemployment, and banking system weaknesses.
President Ebrahim Raisi's administration appears determined to frame Iran's economy as resilient and primed for integration into global markets. During closed-door briefings and public statements, Iranian officials have described an economy that, while constrained, remains capable of offering significant returns to investors willing to navigate complexities. They argue that the US could benefit strategically by encouraging American businesses to tap into this potential, fostering mutual interests and reducing long-term hostilities.
The political backdrop in Washington complicates the prospects for Iran's investment offer. With President Trump signalling a firm stance on trade disputes globally, and elections looming, any engagement with Tehran could be politically risky. Republican lawmakers and some Democrats remain critical of providing Iran with economic relief without extensive, permanent curbs on its nuclear and missile programmes. Meanwhile, hawkish elements in Israel and Gulf Arab states continue to lobby against any agreement that might revitalise Iran's economy without guaranteeing security assurances.
Diplomatic insiders suggest that Iranian negotiators are prepared to offer robust monitoring and transparency measures as part of any new arrangement, aiming to assuage Western fears. However, Tehran also insists that it expects proportional economic returns, including access to frozen assets and the restoration of key banking links to the global financial system. In parallel, Iranian state media has been crafting narratives about a post-sanctions boom, painting a picture of a country eager for a new era of international commerce.
Energy remains a cornerstone of Iran's appeal. As a country with the world's second-largest natural gas reserves and significant oil resources, Iran's integration into global markets could, under different circumstances, help stabilise energy prices. Iranian officials argue that their re-entry into energy markets could serve mutual interests, especially amid volatile global energy dynamics exacerbated by conflicts and supply chain disruptions elsewhere.
Nevertheless, the gap between economic ambitions and political realities remains substantial. Sanctions targeting Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, human rights concerns, and regional interventions complicate any immediate thaw. The Biden administration faces a delicate balancing act, weighing potential benefits of renewed diplomacy against the domestic political cost of engaging with a government widely viewed as adversarial.
Iran's economic pitch also underscores a broader geopolitical calculus. By framing itself as a viable economic partner, Tehran seeks to position itself as a stabilising force rather than a spoiler in regional affairs. Some advisers close to the Iranian leadership believe that deeper economic ties with the West could, over time, lessen Iran's dependency on China and Russia, offering a more balanced foreign policy stance.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The National
28 minutes ago
- The National
Trump executive order launches move to relax US space rocket rules
US President Donald Trump has signed an executive order to ease regulations for space companies launching rockets and carrying out missions. The directive, called Enabling Competition in the Commercial Space Industry, asks federal agencies including the US Department of Transportation and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to speed up the review process for space flight licences and remove outdated regulations. It also asks the Secretary of Transportation, Sean Duffy, to 'eliminate or expedite' environmental reviews for launch and re-entry licences and permits. Such regulations have proven to be a challenge for billionaire Elon Musk and his SpaceX company. The Trump administration said the goal of the executive order, signed on Wednesday, was to make the US a more competitive player in the global space industry. 'By slashing red tape tying up spaceport construction, streamlining launch licences so they can occur at scale and creating high-level space positions in government, we can unleash the next wave of innovation,' said Mr Duffy, who also serves as acting Nasa administrator. 'At Nasa, this means continuing to work with commercial space companies and improving our spaceports' ability to launch." Fast track to launch The Trump administration has historically advocated reducing regulatory barriers and expediting approval processes, especially for industries it considers critical to the country, including as aerospace and defence. Last year, Mr Musk threatened to sue the FAA after it proposed issuing $633,009 worth of penalties to SpaceX for failing to follow licence requirements during two of its launches in 2023. Despite the row between Mr Trump and Mr Musk, SpaceX could benefit most from the executive order, with plans to test its deep-space rocket Starship more frequently. Earlier this year, SpaceX was awarded permission by the FAA to increase launches of the powerful rocket to 25 each year. The directive would also benefit start-ups developing launch technology. Environmental concerns The order also led to opposition from environmental groups, who warned it could weaken protection for wildlife near launch sites. Jared Margolis, of the Centre for Biological Diversity, said the directive 'paves the way for the massive destruction of protected plants and animals". It called the move reckless and said it "puts people and wildlife at risk from private companies launching giant rockets that often explode and wreak devastation on surrounding areas". Race with China Mr Trump's efforts to boost the private space industry would also help the country in the race to the return to the Moon, amid competition form countries including China. Nasa relies on space companies to achieve the goals of its Artemis Moon programme and broader ambitions in the sector. The agency's plan to send astronauts to the lunar language for the first time since the Apollo era will only be possible when SpaceX completes its Starship human landing system. The mission is scheduled to take place on 2027. China also has plans for a human landing mission on the Moon before 2030. Last week, its space agency completed a critical landing and take-off test of its crewed lunar lander.
Zawya
42 minutes ago
- Zawya
India's Reliance makes rare fuel oil purchase from HPCL, sources say
SINGAPORE/NEW DELHI - Reliance Industries, India's biggest buyer of Russian oil, has in recent weeks made rare fuel oil purchases from state-run Hindustan Petroleum Corp, seven industry sources said. The purchases suggest the operator of the world's largest refining complex is diversifying its fuel oil sources as India comes under heavy pressure from Washington over its energy ties with Russia. Reliance and HPCL did not respond to emails seeking comments. Reliance has in recent years snapped up cheap supplies of Russian crude and fuel oil, which have been sold at a discount after Western entities shunned purchases and imposed sanctions against Moscow since the Ukraine war. However U.S. President Donald Trump, who announced 25% import tariffs on Indian goods last month, has threatened further levies if India continues to buy Russian oil. Reliance bought two cargoes of high-sulphur fuel oil (HSFO) from HPCL via tenders that closed in late July to early August, the sources said. The cargoes, of 33,000 metric tons or 209,550 barrels each, are scheduled for loading on August 23-25 and September 8-10 from Visakhapatnam Port, they added. The sources declined to be named as they were not authorised to speak to the media. Reliance typically buys most of its fuel oil from Russia for processing at its coker into higher-value products. This month, Russian fuel oil exports to India are expected to drop below 400,000 tons from above 750,000 tons in July, data from shipping analytics firm Kpler showed. Almost all of the cargoes are imported by Reliance, the data showed. "It's a recent phenomenon (for Reliance) to diversify their slate with cheaper residue barrels," a source familiar with India refinery operations said. Indian state refiners are awaiting clarity from the government on whether to continue importing Russian oil, while Reliance is likely to switch back to Middle Eastern oil if Russian oil is no longer an option, traders have said. Reliance's refining complex at Jamnagar in western India can process about 1.4 million barrels per day of crude.
Middle East Eye
2 hours ago
- Middle East Eye
Cowardice and complicity: Washington's 'special relationship' with Israel
Even the most basic history of US global interventionism - always aimed at preserving its own economic hegemony - undermines the notion that Washington could suddenly become a force for good in the world, regardless of who is in power. From the firebombing of Tokyo to the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki; from the destruction of Dresden to the napalming of Southeast Asia; from the dismantling of the Iraqi state through 'shock and awe' to myriad other coups, assaults and wars, the US has used all manner of weaponry and methods to achieve its goals. But while political analysts and historians have traditionally examined events taking place on the ground, too few have explored the deeper structural policies that set certain mechanisms and modes of legitimacy in place. The CIA operations that recruited former Nazi military, intelligence and scientific figures into the US orbit are a prime example. Such operations, if even mentioned, are typically presented as curiosities of 'spycraft', rather than structural precedents undergirding the behaviour and policies of many US intelligence, military, academic, and corporate institutions. Similarly, the US's embrace of Zionism - and the economic, political and ideological cover it provides for Israeli impunity - enables Tel Aviv to act as the tip of the American imperial spear in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters It was a self-described Zionist, former President Joe Biden, who played a key role in embedding this view in US policy, when he declared in 1986: 'It's about time we stop … apologising for our support for Israel.' Washington's financial support for Israel, he added, is 'the best $3bn investment we make. Were there not an Israel, the United States of America would have to invent an Israel to protect her interests in the region'. That $3bn figure has continued to rise over the years. And under the Trump administration, which has done away with pretence, it is more evident than ever before that Israel is essentially a US base in the region. Layers of obfuscation Given the above, the idea that any single political candidate could cut through all the layers of power, funding and historical obfuscation to attain high office in the US - while still maintaining truly independent positions - is both ludicrous and unrealistic. The range of permissible opinions remains extraordinarily limited, expanding mainly in culture-war areas and narrowing again when it comes to foreign policy. But we forget, at our own peril, that foreign policy is always domestic as well. Thus, no matter how issues are presented, and no matter how unyielding party allegiances might be, most US citizens find themselves completely removed from any form of actual political power, except at a local level - and even there, options can be severely compromised. In a just world, various corporate executives, editors and university administrators could all find themselves culpable for complicity in genocide Exposed to decades of Hollywood propaganda and lacking any direct experience of a foreign military occupation or war on American soil, the American public is largely ignorant of these concepts. Bludgeoned by corporate and state forces that dictate the terms of military interventionism, they seldom connect the dots. While many people - particularly those who benefit less from the status quo - understand the raw machinations of power all too clearly, there is very little they can do to move the needle. It is only in critical times, such as the Vietnam War or the current genocide in Gaza, that broader segments of the population - disgusted by what their taxpayer dollars are supporting - begin to construct a more coherent picture of what is taking place and whose interests are being served. This is the context in which western policies transform fundamental issues of economics, law, morality, and justice into grotesque 'culture wars', enabling severe repression alongside the curtailment of constitutional and civil rights. The role of mainstream media and academia in all of this cannot be understated. In a just world, various corporate executives, editors and university administrators could all find themselves culpable for complicity in genocide. Elaborate mea culpas Today, as myriad countries and mainstream institutions perform elaborate mea culpas - no longer able to hide from images of wounded and starving Palestinians - the rage felt by more and more people around the world is palpable. We would do well to recall the suffocating silence and denials that have accompanied the assassinations of journalists; the abduction, torture and killing of doctors and health workers as their hospitals were destroyed by Israeli troops; the erasure of whole families and communities; the wholesale destruction of Gaza's universities and cultural institutions; and myriad other atrocities and cruelties shielded by US vetoes, propaganda and military funding. We must also remember, first and foremost, that all of this has taken place with hardly a ripple of dissent due to the complicity and cowardice of influential people who had the ability - at least in theory - to take a meaningful stand. Israel's meltdown over western recognition of Palestinian statehood reveals its deepest fears Read More » Could politicians and policies have been held in check, even slightly, if the media had done its job, university administrators had issued condemnations, and healthcare professionals had organised in defence of their counterparts in Gaza? The truth is, in a world where there is little to no real political representation, these people and institutions were actually doing their jobs - and quite well - by serving their corporate, institutional and political masters. Amid this backdrop, direct action has become the mode of choice for those willing to put their safety, freedom and livelihoods on the line in order to disrupt the smooth operations of the genocide machine. We can see this in both spontaneous outbursts and well-planned actions, from Greek citizens preventing Israeli tourists from disembarking, to Egyptian embassies being locked shut by activists, to Palestine Action's work in the UK and its recent designation as a 'terrorist' group. In the US, activists recently descended upon the offices of The New York Times, which has long faced criticism for producing content supportive of Israel, to spray-paint the message 'NYT lies, Gaza dies' on the windows. The upcoming start of the new academic year promises to be filled with novel security measures, surveillance, and the imposition of ever-new forms of punishment. We can only hope that protest movements across myriad sectors continue to gain traction, perhaps inspired by the bravery of former security contractor Anthony Aguilar, who blew the lid off the evils of the Gaza Humanitarian Foundation. At the same time, we must work to see that more Israeli war criminals are brought to justice; that plans to remake the region's geography are met with fierce resistance; and that Israel's impunity and its apartheid regime will be relegated to the dustbin of history. For that to happen, citizens in the 'belly of the beast' - the US - must play a much more significant and risky role. The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.
