The three largest European nations by population, Germany, France and the UK, held talks with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi in Geneva, Switzerland, on Friday, in an effort to avert a protracted war in the Middle East.
US President Donald Trump, who has said he will decide within two weeks whether to join the assault on Tehran, denounced the talks with European leaders as a failure.
“Iran doesn’t want to speak to Europe. They want to speak to us. Europe is not going to be able to help in this one,” he told reporters.
Araghchi had said Iran was not attending the talks in Geneva to negotiate anyway, only to listen.
However, he added, “There is no room for negotiations with the US [either] until the Israeli aggression stops,” as Iran and Israel traded salvoes of missiles and drones.
The US has been Israel’s chief ally and supporter in all its wars, and is the only country with major military assets deployed in the region, which might be able to alter the course of the war.
Why are the Europeans getting involved?
Germany, France and the UK – referred to as the E3 in the context of Iran talks – helped negotiate a 2015 treaty with Iran.
The 2015 treaty, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), saw Iran agree to develop only peaceful nuclear programmes and to submit to independent monitoring. Russia, China and the United States also helped negotiate it, as did the UN.
But Trump withdrew the US from the JCPOA in May 2018, during his first term as president. The E3 tried to keep the treaty alive but failed. Iran abandoned it a year after the US did.
On Saturday, the EU high commissioner for external action, Kaja Kallas, who also attended the talks on Friday, issued a statement reaffirming “commitment to Israel’s security” and “longstanding concerns about Iran’s expansion of its nuclear programme, which has no credible civilian purpose, in violation of almost all the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) provisions”.
But Israel’s war in Gaza has divided the E3 over their approach to Israel, weakening European foreign policy unity further, although all want to avoid another war on Europe’s doorstep.
How are the E3 divided in their approach towards Israel?
The E3 positions on Israel have diverged since Israel’s war in Gaza began in October 2023.
Germany has remained the most ardently pro-Israel, refusing to criticise Israel for indiscriminate bombing of civilians in Gaza and halting its funding to UNWRA, the UN agency assisting Palestinian refugees, which Israel accuses of aiding Hamas.
Originally pro-Israel, the UK somewhat changed its stance after Labour’s election victory last year. Earlier this month, the UK joined four other countries in formally sanctioning Israel’s far-right national security minister, Itamar Ben-Gvir, and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich, for “incitement of violence” against Palestinians in the occupied West Bank and Gaza. Israel called the decision “outrageous” and “unacceptable”.
France is even more sceptical towards Israel. It was one of four EU members that started calling for a Gaza ceasefire in April last year. A year later, on April 9, French President Emmanuel Macron said he would formally recognise the state of Palestine within months, partly because “at some point, it will be right”, and partly to encourage Arab states to recognise Israel. France was reported to be lobbying other European nations to follow suit. Spain, Norway and Ireland all formally recognised Palestine the following month.
What leverage do the E3 have with Iran or Israel?
They are the three biggest economies in Europe, with a collective gross domestic product (GDP) of about $11 trillion.
Two of them, France and the UK, possess aircraft carriers and expeditionary forces that have deployed to the Middle East and North Africa regions. They are also nuclear powers.
Ultimately, though, none of these things is enough to sway either Iran or Israel on matters of national security. The true value of the E3 lies in their “acceptability” to both Iran and Israel as good-faith mediators and their ability to work towards common goals with the US.
“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,” George Tzogopoulos, a lecturer in international relations at the European Institute in Nice, told Al Jazeera. “The same is happening now. We have a war crisis, and these three prioritise diplomacy for the conflict to stop if possible and for negotiations to restart.”
Could the E3 broker a deal between Iran and Israel?
It would be difficult, given their failure to resuscitate the JCPOA without the US.
“The main reason [the E3 failed with the JCPOA] is the conclusion, made by both the Trump administration, President Trump himself, and the Israeli government that diplomacy cannot work in the case of Iran and, therefore, the role of the three was sidelined,” said Tzogopoulos.
But it is also difficult for them to coordinate with the US. Trump has now sidelined his own intelligence community to adopt the Israeli view that Iran is developing a bomb. On Friday, Trump told reporters that his director of national intelligence, Tulsi Gabbard, was “wrong” when she testified that Iran was not building a nuclear weapon and that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei had not re-authorised the country’s suspended nuclear weapons programme.
“If Israel has evidence that Iran was dashing for a bomb, I think it needs to come out more publicly and share that, because nobody else is confirming that assessment,” said Kelsey Davenport, director for nonproliferation policy at the Arms Control Association, a nongovernmental organisation based in the US.
“If there is some coordination between the US and the E3, we might be more optimistic, but for Europe, for the E3 to act autonomously, I wouldn’t bet my money on their potential success,” he said.
“The Europeans have very low chances,” agreed Angelos Syrigos, a professor of international law at Panteion University in Athens. “The only people who can intervene seriously are the Americans. But I don’t know if the Iranians are open to that. To have final peace, you usually need a decisive defeat,” he said, referring to the Yom Kippur War between Israel and Egypt of 1973, which led to the Camp David agreement six years later, and US intervention in the Yugoslav War, which led to the Dayton Accord in 1995. “One party has to understand there is no military solution.”
Could the United Nations Security Council find a diplomatic solution?
No, say experts, because China, Russia and the US disagree on Israel and Iran.
“The Security Council won’t find a solution to this,” said Syrigos. “Either the US or Russia or China will veto it. The difference is mainly between the US and China. The Chinese have invested a lot in Iran in recent years. That’s where they buy most of their oil; they send [Iran] materials for nuclear weapons. It’s China that is mostly connected to Iran.”
Russia has called on the US not to attack Iran, because of the risk of destabilising the region. But Russia also does not have the power to come to Iran’s aid, said Syrigos.
“Right now, Russia is going along with the US. It doesn’t want to get involved. It hasn’t the power. So, it’s turning a necessity into a voluntary act,” he said.
“The logic of war will guide diplomatic efforts at this point, and we cannot know how the war will go, or the extent of the damage to Iran’s nuclear programme,” said Tzogopoulos.
Leave a comment