Iran-US negotiations in Islamabad, analysis by Ambassador Sequi

“We can certainly expect a very difficult meeting between two countries that wanted this truce as their own victory, despite both being very tried by the war.” Ambassador Ettore Sequi, former secretary general of the Farnesina, told Adnkronos on the eve of the start of negotiations between the United States and Iran in Islamabad. “It is a negotiation that starts out very fragile but both parties have an interest in keeping it going and not to appear responsible for a possible failure”, warns Sequi, according to whom the negotiation is already marked by profound divergences. “The United States – explains the former ambassador to Beijing – imagine a truce functional to stabilize the system, reopen Hormuz and contain Iran, while Tehran uses it as a lever to consolidate its legitimacy as a regime and as a regional power”. “Quite incompatible” objectives, which make the comparison complex but not destined to fail in the short term: “Both have no interest in ruining the negotiation“, he observed, also hypothesizing a possible extension of the truce beyond the initial 15 days.

The role of Israel

A further element of fragility, explained the ambassador, is represented by Israel, defined as the ‘ghost’ that will hover over the room“, who “does not sit at the table but can determine its fate”. “A local crisis like Lebanon can correspond to a global shock like Hormuz”, he underlined, highlighting how the control of the Strait is now “politicised”, with Tehran exercising “a regime of authorisation, intimidation and political and economic control” over navigation. In this context, he added, “Trump is discovering the limits of the truce: there was a ceasefire, but not the restoration of freedom of navigation”.

The delegations

Regarding the composition of the delegations, Sequi spoke of a relevant political signal: the presence of Vice President JD Vance indicates “a very high level” and entails “de facto legitimization of the Iranian regime”. At the same time, it also reflects internal American dynamics: Vance is “the referent of the Maga base, so fundamental to Trump but which is already starting to show cracks”. “Compared to Secretary of State Rubio – added the ambassador – Vance is a person who has made no secret from the beginning, even since the electoral campaign, that he is not particularly convinced of the opportunity of an attack on Iran”.

The knots on the table

As for the contents, Sequi believes that the Lebanese dossier remains central but difficult to resolve immediately: “There is not even an agreement on the points to discuss”, he explained, directly linking the issue to tensions in the Strait of Hormuz. Israel, in fact, “does not consider the confrontation concluded until it has inflicted a decisive blow on Hezbollah and until it has control of the buffer zone that goes from the border to the Litani river”. “As long as they don’t control that area there is a problem,” the ambassador highlighted.

China’s position

Finally, on the hypothesis of a role for China in favoring the negotiation, raised by President Donald Trump, Sequi underlines how the dynamic is “very interesting”. “Contrary to other dossiers such as Gaza, here China has a direct advantage”, linked above all to energy security: “It imports 40% of its oil from the Gulf and a significant share from Iran”. Beijing, he explained, also acts indirectly through Pakistan and aims to obtain a double advantage: “Helping Trump get out of the dead or semi-dead alley he has entered” and strengthening its international image. “The Chinese are emerging as a predictable, responsible and peace-loving power, unlike America’s unpredictability and aggressiveness“, he concluded, highlighting how they can emerge from this crisis “in profit both on an energy and geopolitical level, also in terms of soft power”. (by Valerio Sarsini Novak)