In early August, the European Union presented what its top diplomat Josep Borrell called “a final text” to restore the deal and demanded answers from Washington and Tehran. Iran submitted its response last week. the US has yet to respond. Borrell said on Monday that the Iranian response was “reasonable”. On Monday, Price said the US was still conducting consultations, telling reporters: “We are working as quickly as we can, as methodically as we can and as carefully as we can to make sure our response is complete. It is taking into account the Iranian feedback and we will provide it to the EU as soon as we can.” He also said the US was “taking its comments directly and privately to the EU”, which is acting as a mediator between the two sides. Price said Iran had complicated the negotiations, noting that the US was prepared to accept the EU’s “final text” deal, but Iran “responded with a lot of comments”. “That’s why it took some extra time to look at these comments and determine our response,” he said, adding that “if there had been a clear Iranian response, a clear answer yes, I’m not sure we would have been back and forth like we are now.” Still, Price said the U.S. was “encouraged that Iran appears to have abandoned some of its non-initial demands,” including delisting the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a foreign terrorist organization, but ” there are still some outstanding issues that need to be resolved, some gaps that need to be bridged.” He also reiterated the U.S.’s desire for a quick mutual return to compliance with the deal “knowing the stakes of the status quo” — namely, a short “glow time” before Iran has enough fissile material needed to produce a nuclear weapon. A senior administration official said the Biden administration believes keeping the deal intact would extend that breakup time by months. “The place we are now, where Iran could produce enough material for a bomb within days to weeks is a very dangerous place. And extending that timeline under the renewed deal is much better,” said Eric Brewer. senior director at the Nuclear Threat Initiative. “A six-month fission timetable in my view is sufficient. That would give the international community enough time to detect any attempts by Iran to break out and time to try to resolve it diplomatically before having to consider a military option. “ Henry Rome, deputy head of research at Eurasia Group, told CNN that even if a deal is reached, Iran is likely to “continue with what it has been doing until the implementation process begins.” “Then, throughout that process, they’re going to be asked to take some physical steps to stop production of certain types of material, dispose of certain types of material, export it or other means, dismantle some equipment and steps like that,” he explained. . Price declined to specify what “outstanding issues” remain. Rome told CNN that he believes “the two main substantive points of conflict remain the issues around Iranian financial guarantees, as well as trying to find a way to square the circle in the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) safeguards investigation.” The IAEA, which acts as the UN’s nuclear watchdog, has demanded answers from Iran about why traces of enriched uranium were found at a previously undeclared nuclear research facility three years ago. IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi told CNN’s Becky Anderson on Monday that the agency will not dismiss this investigation without “technically credible explanations” from Iran. Rome noted that “the latest European draft included this language (on the IAEA safeguards investigation), the Iranians apparently did not object to it, although they did not necessarily accept it.” “It’s also inextricably linked to this process, even if technically it’s separate, because the Iranians have been clear that they will not move forward with the JCPOA if the safeguards issue is still hanging there,” he said. CNN’s Adam Pourahmadi contributed to this report.
