Demands of US and Iran were too different to reach agreement in talks - expert

RIGA - That the talks between the United States and Iran ended without an agreement could be expected, because the demands of each side were too different, Maris Andzans, an associate professor at Riga Stradins University (RSU) and director of the Center for Geopolitical Studies, told LETA.

The failure to reach an agreement is not surprising, the expert said, given the history of relations between Iran and the US since the Islamic Revolution in Iran, as well as recent events. In his view, such a history is too deep for a rapid resolution of the situation, so it is not surprising that the talks ended without a tangible result.

Andzans noted that different versions of the content of the talks from both sides are circulating in the public sphere, as each side tells its own story, but overall it is clear that the demands were too different to reach an agreement. According to Andzans, Iran had a number of demands, including not only an end to the war, but also an end to hostilities in Lebanon, a long-term peace, reparations for war damage, and permanent control over the Strait of Hormuz.

For its part, the US has sought an end to Iran's nuclear program, the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz, and an end to support for Iran-backed groups.

In the expert's view, it is quite interesting that two US warships passed through the Strait of Hormuz yesterday. The expert said that it was not yet clear what had actually happened, as the US announced such a maneuver, but Iran denied it.

He added that the deputy speaker of the Iranian parliament also said today that the Strait of Hormuz would remain under Iranian control and that ships will be charged tolls for safe passage. One version is that there may have been some informal agreement between the sides allowing such a maneuver, although this has been publicly denied in order for both sides to save face, the expert said.

At the same time, it is possible that the US decided independently to take such a step, thereby creating a major dilemma for Iran. From the US point of view, such a maneuver taken independently would have been very dangerous, as it does not have complete security against mines, and as Iran retains its coast guard systems, including drones, maritime drones, and air drones.

In such a narrow strait, the warning time can be just seconds and it would have been an extremely dangerous maneuver on the US part. Moreover, if Iran tried to attack these ships, the war would resume at full force.

"The US may have taken such a risk, but there may have been some kind of understanding," the expert said. Three scenarios are possible: an escalation of hostilities, the continuation of negotiations, or a situation in which everything remains "hanging in the air", namely, the war ends without a formal agreement and the hostilities do not continue.