In an effort to avert a drawn-out Middle East war, the three largest European countries, Germany, France, and the UK, held talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi on Friday in Geneva, Switzerland.
Donald Trump, the president of the US, criticized the failed negotiations with European leaders and said he would decide within two weeks whether to join the Iranian assault.
“Iran is not interested in talking to Europe.” They want to speak with us. He told reporters, “Europe will not be able to assist in this one.”
Araghchi claimed that Iran was only listening to the negotiations taking place in Geneva.
As Iran and Israel exchanged missile and drone wars, he added, “There is no room for negotiations with the US]either] until the Israeli aggression stops.”
The US is the only nation with significant military forces stationed in the area that has the potential to alter the course of the conflict because it has always been Israel’s main ally and supporter.
Why are Europeans enlisting in this?
Germany, France, and the UK – sometimes referred to as the E3 in Iran-related negotiations – played a key role in the 2015 agreement with Iran.
Iran agreed to develop only peaceful nuclear programs and be subject to independent monitoring under the 2015 treaty, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Along with the UN, Russia, China, and the United States all contributed to the negotiations.
Trump, however, withdrawn the US from the JCPOA in May 2018. The E3 tried unsuccessfully to keep the treaty in place. One year later, the US abandoned it by Iran.
Kaja Kallas, the EU’s top official for external affairs, reiterated on Saturday that she was committed to “improving Israel’s security” and that her “longstanding concerns about Iran’s expansion of its nuclear program, which has no credible civilian purpose, are in violation of almost all Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provisions.
However, the E3 have been divided over their policy toward Israel because of its conflict there, further deteriorating the EU’s commitment to a new war on its doorstep.
How do the E3’s views toward Israel differ from one another?
Since Israel’s occupation of Gaza in October 2023, the E3’s positions on Israel have diverged.
Israel has continued to be the most fervently pro-Israeli country, refusing to criticize Israel for its arbitrary bombing of civilians in Gaza and halting funding of UNWRA, a UN agency that Israel claims aids Hamas.
Following Labour’s victory in the election last year, the UK somewhat changed its position. It was initially pro-Israel. Itamar Ben-Gvir, Israel’s far-right national security minister, and Bezalel Smotrich, finance minister, were officially sanctioned by the UK earlier this month for their “initiation of violence” against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza, along with four other nations. Israel referred to the decision as “unacceptable” and “outrageous.”
Israel is viewed with even greater skepticism in France. In April of last year, one of the EU’s four members began calling for a ceasefire in Gaza. French President Emmanuel Macron declared he would formally recognize Palestine within months on April 9th, partly to encourage Arab states to do so and to encourage them to do so. Besides France, it is alleged that other European countries are urging others to do the same. The following month, Spain, Norway, and Ireland all formally recognized Palestine.
What leverage does the E3 have over Israel or Iran?
With a combined gross domestic product (GBP) of about $11 trillion, they are Europe’s three biggest economies.
Aircraft carriers and expeditionary forces have been deployed to the Middle East and North Africa, respectively, in two of them, France and the UK. They also possess nuclear weapons.
In the end, however, none of these things will be persuasive enough to influence either Iran or Israel on matters of national security. The true value of the E3 lies in their ability to work toward a common goal with the US and accept Iran and Israel as good-faith mediators.
According to George Tzogopoulos, a lecturer in international relations at the European Institute in Nice, “Germany, France, and the UK have attempted to mediate for more than 20 years, and their approach has been milder than that of the US.” “The same thing is occurring right now.” These three prioritize diplomacy over starting the conflict and allowing the conflict to end if necessary.
Could Iran and Israel cooperate with the E3 to broker a deal?
Given that they didn’t succeed in reviving the JCPOA without the US, it would be challenging.
The Trump administration, President Trump himself, and the Israeli government all came to the conclusion that diplomacy cannot work in the case of Iran, and that is why the role of the three was diminished, according to Tzogopoulos.
They have trouble coordinating with the US, which is also true. Trump has since criticized the intelligence community in his own country for accepting that Iran is developing a bomb. Trump’s director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, claimed that Iran was not developing nuclear weapons and that Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had not re-authorized the nation’s suspended nuclear weapons program. Gabbard later claimed she was “wrong.”
No one else is confirming that assessment, so I believe Israel needs to come out more publicly and share it, according to Kelsey Davenport, director for non-proliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, a non-governmental organization with headquarters in the US.
I wouldn’t bet my money on their potential success, he said, “But if there is some coordination between the US and the E3, we might be more optimistic.”
Angelos Syrigos, a professor of international law at Panteion University in Athens, said, “The Europeans have very low chances.” The Americans are the only ones who can take matters seriously. I’m not sure if Iran is willing to do that, though. He cited the 1973 Yom Kippur War between Israel and Egypt, which led to the Camp David Agreement six years later, and US intervention in the Yugoslav War, which led to the 1995 Dayton Accord. “You typically need a decisive defeat to have final peace,” he said. There is no military solution, according to one party.
Could there be a diplomatic solution, according to the UN Security Council?
Because of differences between China, Russia, and the US regarding Iran and Israel, experts say no.
Syrigos remarked, “The Security Council won’t find a solution to this.” “We will veto it, China, Russia, or the US.” The US and China are the main differences. In recent years, China has made a significant investment in Iran. They send Iranian materials for nuclear weapons to that location, where they typically get their oil. China is primarily associated with Iran.
Russia has urged the US to refrain from attacking Iran because it runs the risk of destabilizing the region. Russia is not able to aid Iran, according to Syrigos.
Russia is currently supporting the US. It is reluctant to get involved. It lacks power, though. Therefore, he claimed, “it’s turning a necessity into a voluntary act.”
