Tehran has decided to go ahead with the third phase of curtailing Iran’s obligations under the JCPOA.
It seems that this step could lead to negative consequences: the further escalation of the situation around Iran, and in the region as a whole.
Of course, from an emotional point of view, we can understand the Iranians.
The United States unilaterally and treacherously broke out of an agreement that was worked out with such difficulties.
After this step, a situation arose where all the remaining signatories of the agreement formed what can be thought of as one camp and advocated maintaining the agreement; they were supported by the UN. The United States remained alone in insisting that the deal had been insufficient (aside from Israel); Washington was clearly perceived as the direct originator of a new round of tension in the Persian Gulf.
The United States was unsatisfied with this arrangement; it tried to attract Europeans to its side – but failed to do so.
Now, after the start of Iran’s “reversal”, it could be possible to interpret Tehran’s steps away from the JCPOA as a withdrawal from the agreement, as the emergence of yet another “violator” of the deal.
We can hardly expect that the tightening of the Tehran’s stance will impress Washington. On the contrary, this can be interpreted as the success of attempts to “drag” Iran into a new aggravation of the situation in the Gulf.
Russia has responded to the move by calling upon the parties to abandon the dangerous escalation of “negative” steps. The call for restraint, of course, is directed primarily towards the United States.
In the works is a meeting of representatives of the countries of the region and the main “extra-regional” players operating in the strategic area of the Persian Gulf, whicn could be held on September 18-19 in Moscow for the creation of a regional security system.
There is no doubt that the issue of developing measures aimed at overcoming the dangerous development of events around Iran will occupy an important place on the agenda of the meeting.
It seems that the potential, authority and influence of the expert community and public organisations can serve to solve the problem of changing the vector of development within the region – from a course towards confrontation to one where the likelihood of military confrontation would be reduced, and develop mutually beneficial economic and trade ties.