The JCPOA and Macron's Negotiations with Trump from the Perspective of Former French Ambassador to Tehran

Emmanuel Macron's three-day trip to Washington began on Monday. This trip comes ahead of the May 12 deadline regarding the future of the JCPOA, and Europeans hope to persuade U.S. President Donald Trump not to withdraw from the agreement. The three European countries; France, Britain, and Germany have been in discussions with the Americans for weeks, trying to find a solution that addresses Washington's concerns about the JCPOA while allowing the agreement to continue. Our conversation with François Nicolo, former French ambassador to Tehran, centers on Macron's trip. Nicolo has written numerous articles in recent years about the nuclear negotiations and their challenges. He served as France's ambassador to Iran from 2001 to 2005, during the early stages of Western negotiations with Tehran. One of the main topics of Macron's trip to Washington is the preservation of the JCPOA. In recent weeks and months, France has taken a leading role in these European efforts. Why do you think France has taken on and is playing this key role? This is part of Macron's character to strive and find solutions. He tries to talk to everyone, to the Iranians, to Trump, to Putin, and this does not mean he agrees with all of them, but he is seeking a solution. Essentially, this is a good thing. As a result, France has been a leader, but Britain and Germany have also made efforts, as all three countries share responsibility in this area; they, along with the United States, China, and Russia, have negotiated for a long time and feel a responsibility to find a solution for the current crisis that satisfies other Europeans as well. How do you see the outlook? Will the Europeans succeed in persuading the U.S. to remain in the agreement? Two trips are taking place. First, President Macron and then Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, will go to Washington. Both are working in the same direction to keep Trump in the agreement. Most observers and experts believe that Europe will not succeed. Personally, I have the opposite view. I am not betting on it, but I am somewhat optimistic and think Macron and Merkel have a slight chance of persuading Trump to stay in the agreement. Are there specific signs that make you remain optimistic? First, even Trump's more hawkish advisors are somewhat hesitant. Interestingly, Mike Pompeo, who is seen as a hawkish figure in U.S. politics and is set to become Secretary of State, has stated he prefers the agreement to be amended rather than destroyed. Another advisor to Trump, John Bolton, who is an important figure in this regard, has remained silent so far. What Macron has previously said and tells Trump is that there is no other plan, and if he withdraws from the agreement, he steps into uncharted territory and starts a new crisis in a region already embroiled in multiple crises. Therefore, there are good reasons to stay in the agreement even if everyone agrees that this agreement does not solve all problems with Iran. We all know this. It is an agreement focused on nuclear issues and does not address ballistic missiles, power balance, or Iran's role in the region. If the U.S. leaves the agreement, there is a risk that Iran will also withdraw, and then anything can happen. Not that Iran will build a bomb; Iran has never said it wants to build a bomb and knows that this would create more problems for it. However, Iran will be able to work with sensitive technologies. It will still be under the agency's supervision, but this supervision will not be as strict. This will worry the United States and many in the region. If, contrary to what you think, the Europeans fail to persuade Trump to stay in the JCPOA, what impact will this have on relations between these countries and their ally across the Atlantic? I think this could create a difficult situation between Europeans and the United States. The key issue here is oil. If the U.S. withdraws from the agreement, sanctions against those who buy oil from Iran may be reimposed. This could create many problems for Europe and prompt them to react. The European Union usually does not act very boldly when facing the U.S., but when it comes to vital issues, such as economic matters, it may react more strongly. Do you think that the Europeans' economic relations with Iran are so important to them that they might react? Not all of them. However, the failure of some agreements will create dissatisfaction; for example, if Airbus cannot sell planes (the same goes for Boeing) or if Total cannot invest in Iran. But ultimately, I think the main point is oil. Of course, it is also possible that the U.S. will leave the JCPOA but not reinstate secondary sanctions on oil. Those sanctions did not allow the purchase of Iranian oil. In 2012, Europeans agreed and somewhat compromised not to buy Iranian oil. There was a common goal between Europe and the U.S. for this, but if this time there is no common goal, why should we think that Europe will make sacrifices again?