The next seven days are “make or break” for avoiding conflict between Iran and the US, said Dominic Waghorn at Sky News. “Fingers are on the trigger and one misstep could lead to repercussions which will be felt beyond the Middle East.”
Washington and Tehran are set for diplomatic talks over a nuclear deal in Istanbul on Friday, along with counterparts from the Middle East including Turkey, Qatar and Egypt. Amid ongoing internal protests in Iran, and Donald Trump’s “massive armada” in the Gulf, “the region is heading for a crunch point” if a deal cannot be reached.
What did the commentators say? Middle Eastern diplomats are making “strenuous efforts” to “narrow the gaps” between the two sides, said The Washington Post. Previous talks have been frosty and “indirect”. If the proposed meeting goes ahead, the presence of many of the region’s foreign ministers “may help pave the way to direct negotiations between the US and Iranian envoys”.
The US president will consider only limited strikes, or no attack at all, if he forces Iran to “abandon its nuclear ambitions”, said Chris Hughes in The Mirror. As his rhetoric has escalated, he has “backed himself into having to make a big decision”. For spectators, it is a “nail-biting” time: “it is hard to imagine so many hundreds of billions of pounds worth of killer machinery and personnel being sent to the Middle East without an offensive happening”.
This could be “brinkmanship”, said Bamo Nouri, an international politics academic, in The Conversation. A war with Iran “would not be swift, cheap or decisive”, and any major attack could “backfire politically” at home.
What next? Iran faces a “simultaneous crisis of domestic legitimacy and a credible threat of external attack”, leaving it more vulnerable than ever before, said Sanam Vakil of the Chatham House think tank, in The Guardian.
There are three possible outcomes: a “forced compromise”, which would seem to Iran’s people a “bargain for the sake of the regime’s survival”; a “controlled war”, resulting in “prolonged instability”; or, most concerningly, Iran’s total collapse. The latter could turn the country into a “long-term source of instability”, and pave the way for a regime “more perilous” than the one it replaces.
|