Saeed Jalili’s record as Iran’s top nuclear negotiator says that if he gets elected as Iran’s president, he should really change his foreign policy approach.
Saeed Jalili took over Iran’s nuclear case from Ali Larijani with 50 nuclear-related sanctions against the Islamic Republic and handed it over to Javad Zarif with 500 sanctions. In addition, it is worth mentioning that 85% of the assassinations of Iran’s nuclear scientists took place during Jalili’s tenure as top nuclear negotiator.
But despite all these dark spots in his curriculum vitae, he seems to still believe in the “negotiation for negotiation” strategy, even if no achievement is made.
Jalili’s opposition to negotiations with the US to lift the sanctions imposed on the people of Iran continued even after the agreement of then-president Mahmud Ahmadinejad to do so back in 2011. Later, Zarif revealed in his memoirs that “during Mr. Ahmadinejad’s government, negotiations with Oman began with Dr. Salehi’s persistence and with the permission of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, and we had realized the harm of these UNSC resolutions. However, Mr. Jalili was even against negotiations with Oman at the time.”
Jalili is a born conservative in foreign policy!
Jalili was indeed a conservative in every fiber of his being. He wanted to avoid making any form of concessions to the American side, even if it cost more and more sanctions against Iran, a hardline approach that was not rational even from the point of view of Iran’s Supreme Leader at the time.
William Burns, the former US Deputy Secretary of State, writes in his memories of the 5+1 negotiations with Iran during Jalili’s time. He says: “Jalili was constantly taking notes during the meetings, and at the same time he had a carefree smile on his face. The Iranian negotiating team looked at me many times and seemed to find worrying the presence of the United States in the meetings with European negotiators.”
He goes on to say: “Jalili started a 40-minute speech in one of the meetings and philosophized the whole time about Iran’s culture and history, as well as the constructive role it can play in the region. This was his policy when he wanted to avoid a direct answer. He even said in a part of his speech that he still teaches part-time at Tehran University.”
These words are well proof that Jalili’s goal in the negotiations was not to reach an agreement but to guide the other party to do what Jalili himself might not have a clear vision of.
All in all, the history of Iran’s nuclear talks shows very well that the country has experienced both coming to the negotiating table and a hardline stance to make zero concessions. However, it was only during Raisi’s government that Iran looked like to have found a good balance between the two stances.
Therefore, if Jalili gets elected as president of Iran, he should better continue the path that the late president Raisi took than stick to his own risk-free and yet non-productive foreign policy approach.
