Bridging differences

AS Pakistani mediators are working hard to bridge gaps between the United States and Iran vis-à-vis their positions on issues involved, Washington reacted cautiously to the latest offer of Tehran saying President Donald Trump was ‘unhappy’ with the proposal as it does not address Iran’s nuclear programme. At the same time, Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, on Monday acknowledged that Iran was “serious” about reaching a deal with the United States, but any agreement must prevent it from developing a nuclear weapon. It is significant to note that the reaction given by the United States after President Trump consulted his security aides on the Iranian proposal means Washington has not rejected outright the proposed plan and some sort of understanding can be developed in the days to come as Pakistan and several other countries have become active to facilitate and encourage the de-escalation process between the two countries. It is logical not to expect a broad agreement encompassing all aspects of the conflict between the United States and Iran as there are fundamental differences on the nuclear issue. It is because of the sensitivities of the two sides and high stakes that Iran wants the nuclear issue to be discussed at a later stage. Its position becomes understandable as the US/Israeli invasion of the country has strengthened calls for a nuclear deterrence and it will be difficult for the leadership in Tehran to accept the US demand for abandoning the nuclear option at a time when the atmosphere is highly charged over concerns to national security and sovereignty. Reopening of Strait of Hormuz is also a demand and urgent requirement of the international community as well because double blockade (Iranian restrictions and American naval blockade) has put enormous strains on the global economy as underlined by a sharp rise in prices of oil and gas. Therefore, the two countries must agree to lift their blockades and allow commercial ships to navigate without any threat or