Conflict with Islamic State spurs Iran nuclear negotiations

“The enemy of my enemy is my friend.”

This old mantra is proving true as two very unlikely nations – the U.S. and Iran – are beginning to align in the struggle against the Islamic State.

Tuesday, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani made a firm commitment to Iraq in the fight against the Islamic State. According to the state newspaper, Rouhani deemed the security of the two countries “inseparable.”

In this conflict, Iran has backed Iraq “from the first day and will remain on that path until the last day,” said Rouhani.

The Washington Post reported that, following this new alliance, “Iran and the United States are essentially on the same side” in opposition to the Islamic State.

Asaib Ahl al-Haq, an Iranian-backed militant group that was once a dominant force in killing American troops, is now leading the fight in Iraq. As a consequence, United States military forces are effectively fighting a common enemy alongside Iran.

This is not to say that tensions have been resolved between the two states.

Javad Zarif, Iran’s minister of foreign affairs, has called the U.S.-led coalition against the Islamic State group a “coalition of the repenters.” He said that many countries now fighting against the Sunni extremists have been supporting them for several years.

Iran also holds a close allegiance with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. As U.S. action against the Islamic State in Syria has not been approved by Assad’s administration, Rouhani has called U.S. airstrikes within Syrian borders “illegal” and “ambiguous at best.”

Despite otherwise strained relations, Secretary of State John Kerry entered into talks with Iranian officials last month about ending sanctions based on Iran’s nuclear program and discussed the threat posed by the Islamic State. In the past, the U.S. has been a leading advocate for sanctions against Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Bernadette Meehan, the spokeswoman for the U.S. National Security Council, said last week recent negotiations with Iran have made it clear that “initially there would be suspension of any of the U.S. and international sanctions regime, and that the lifting of sanctions will only come when the IAEA verifies that Iran has met serious and substantive benchmarks.”

This new opportunity for negotiation is “[Iran’s] chance to boost the economy, reconnect with the world and end Iran’s status as a pariah state,” according to The New York Times. 

According to The Wall Street Journal, “Iran hadn't been immediately responsive" in past negotiations. However "western diplomats have said [recent] talks had been more constructive.” The current deadline for an international agreement as to Tehran’s future nuclear activities and imposed sanctions is Nov. 24.

As negotiations move forward, one of the larger obstacles may be a shift in U.S. politics – midterm elections set to take place Nov. 4.

In the coming election, Democrats are not expected to retake the House of Representatives and Republicans be given a chance to gain a majority in the Senate.

Sean Theriault, University of Texas-Austin professor and former Richmond student, spoke on the coming elections in the Brown-Alley Room on campus last Wednesday. When asked what effect the midterm elections might have on negotiations with Iran, Theriault said that while Obama was trying to strike a deal, Republicans were more splintered on foreign policy than Democrats.

“Democrats are willing, I think at this point, to give Obama lots of discretion in what we do over there [Iran],” he said. “But there are Republicans [saying] we need to make sure that our friends in the region know that they’re our friends… and then you have [Republicans] that say, ‘That’s someone else’s problem.’”

Regarding Iranian negotiations, Theriault recognized a crossroads America is facing in its foreign policy. As the Islamic State continues to pose a threat to U.S. interests, the Republican Party will have to decide “if they’re going to be the party of isolationists, or if they’re going to be the party of Ronald Reagan and strong defense,” Theriault said. “And it’s not clear at all how that debate shapes out.”

Contact reporter Adam Gibson at adam.gibson@richmond.edu