U.S. Countdown to an Unprecedented War with Iran / Abolfath: The Next War Could Last Longer / Reaching an Agreement Likely Requires a Miracle

U.S. affairs analyst Amirali Abolfath told Safir Arjan: Iran insists that the Strait of Hormuz must first be reopened before nuclear negotiations begin. The Islamabad memorandum envisioned a 60-day period that may now be shortened, but Iran does not want to address both issues in a single phase.

Ambassador of Arjan - Mohammad Aref Moazi: The increase of American military movements in the region and the raising of new accusations against Iran have strengthened the speculations about the possibility of resuming the war. The deployment of new American troops and accusations against Tehran about regional developments, including the conflicts in Yemen, are raised in a situation where the prospect of an end to tensions remains unclear.

Meanwhile, the failure of the US-Israeli joint military operation to force Iran to surrender during the 40-day conflict has raised the question of whether a possible future attack will be of a different intensity and dimensions. The prolongation of the war and the use of more powerful weapons are among the scenarios that arise if the conflicts escalate again.

In the field of diplomacy, despite Iran's proposal for a seven-day period of tension reduction and the start of negotiations from the end of September, the process of reaching an agreement is still facing uncertainty. The reports about America's response and the review of Tehran's reform proposals have once again highlighted the difference in views of the two sides regarding negotiation priorities, especially the issue of the Strait of Hormuz and the nuclear issue.

Eight months have passed since the start of the war and the failure of cease-fires and various initiatives to end it, it is still unclear whether military escalation can bring the parties closer to their goals or whether diplomacy will find a way to reach a lasting agreement.

In this regard, Ambassador Arjan discussed the details of this incident in a conversation with Amir Ali Abulfath, an expert on American issues.

In the following, you will read the details of the conversation of "Ambassador Arjan" with Amir Ali Abul Fatah;

All evidence points to the possibility of another violent war / the time of the next attack is not known

*** Speculations about the possibility of escalation of American military actions against Iran have increased in recent weeks, considering the deployment of new American forces to the region and repeated American excuses, including claims related to sabotage operations in an English base or accusing Iran of conflicts in Yemen, how likely do you think it is to resume American military attacks on Iran?

It seems that the next attack will happen with a high probability; However, I do not want to say that this will happen 100%. Its time is also unknown.

Some experts set a time for this attack and say it will happen this week, next week or in 10 days; But I can't give an exact time. However, all the evidence points to another fierce war on the way.

The duration of the next war could be longer/the targets attacked and the weapons used could be different.

*** Considering that 40 days of joint military aggression by the US and Israel from March 9 failed to force Iran to surrender, do you think we will see a new form of military aggression if the conflicts resume?

That's exactly how it is. Either there should be no re-attack or if such an action is to be taken, it will be quantitatively and qualitatively different. In the sense that the duration of the war can be more and longer.

The first war lasted 12 days and the next war lasted 40 days. Therefore, the next war could be longer. In terms of quality, both in terms of the targets that are attacked and the weapons that are used, we may see more intense attacks.

America wants Iran to negotiate on the nuclear issue at the same time as negotiations to lift the maritime blockade/Iran insists that the Strait of Hormuz should be opened first and then the nuclear negotiations should begin.

*** From the end of September, Iran presented a proposal for a 7-day de-escalation period and the start of negotiations. Now it is said that America has given its response to Iran's proposal and Tehran is considering America's reform proposals. What do you think is the reason for the long response process to this proposal? What effect will prolonging the negotiation process have on the upcoming events?

I don't know the details of these proposals and I don't know what was said in the negotiations or how these reform plans were set up. So, I can't say where the problem is. However, it seems that the difference of views about priorities can be one of the reasons for this situation.

Iran insists that the Strait of Hormuz should be opened first and then the nuclear negotiations should begin. A 60-day period was discussed in the Islamabad Memorandum, which may be reduced now. But Iran does not want to deal with both issues at the same time.

The package that Iran is considering includes the issue of Strait of Hormuz, maritime blockade and oil sales. On the other hand, the American side says that all issues should be examined at the same stage; It means that Iran should be ready to negotiate on the nuclear issue at the same time as the negotiations related to the lifting of the maritime blockade and the issue of the Strait of Hormuz.

America may not achieve its goals in the next war

*** In case of the resumption of severe military conflicts, will the two sides get closer to their goals and demands, and will neither side have the opportunity to achieve their goals through military means?

We are in a period of uncertainty and I really cannot comment on the possible outcome of the war in such detail. So far, America has not achieved the goals it wanted in two high-intensity wars and one low-intensity war.

It can be assumed that it may not reach its goals in the next war; But conditions can be different. Everything depends on how America acts and what Iran's reaction is.

Achieving a favorable agreement may require a miracle/continuing negotiations does not necessarily mean reaching an agreement

*** Considering that 8 months have passed since the beginning of the war and the failure of several cease-fires, understandings and initiatives to end the war, is there still a perspective in the success of diplomacy?

Diplomacy is still ongoing and negotiations are ongoing. Diplomacy does its job; But I consider reaching a favorable agreement very far from reach. However, the diplomatic process is still being pursued.

Diplomacy means negotiation; But reaching an agreement that satisfies both parties is very difficult and may require a miracle.