The temporary deal between Iran and Western powers including the United States was quite shocking if it was not unexpected. Some experts have called it ‘most important deal in last ten years’ as the issue was in a deadlock for so many years and having a look at the rigidity of both the sides, any such deal did not seem possible. Anyhow, this deal has greatly been praised by all the peace-loving nations of the world and is regarded as a small but crucial step towards a comprehensive deal between the sides for which the talks will begin very soon and six months’ time frame has been suggested to reach to that agreement.

The good thing is that, both the sides seem happy of it and both regard it as ‘our victory.’ Iranian politicians have called it a major breakthrough when their right of attaining nuclear power for peaceful purposes has been accepted by the West which always doubted on the intentions of Iran in this regard and blamed her of attaining this power to make destructive nuclear weapon. On the other hand, the so-called P5+1 group including of the US, the UK, Russia, China, France and Germany call it as an important step when the world has become a safer place to live.  According to them, the nuclear deal would not allow Iran to enrich Uranium to the level when it can be used to make nuclear weapons. Iran asserts that it will continue its nuclear program for peaceful purposes.

According to the deal, Iran will neutralize and bring down the 20-percent enriched Uranium to the level of 5-percent enrichment while it will stop its work on the Arak plant which is supposed to be used to produce Plutonium that can be alternated for enriched Uranium. UN inspectors will have now greater access to inspect the Iranian nuclear sites of Natanz and Fordo. In compensation for all these, there will be no further sanctions on Iran by the West and 7 billion dollars of Iran will be released that were stopped as part of the sanctions.

However, American president Obama made it clear that if Iran did not fulfill its promises, more severe sanctions will be brought into action and everything will be reversed against it. On the other hand, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Muhammad Javad Zarif said the agreement was an opportunity for the removal of any doubts about the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program. But he insisted that Iran had not given up its right to enrich Uranium. ‘We believe that the current agreement has a very clear reference to the fact that the Iranian enrichment program will continue and will be a part of any agreement, now and in the future’, he said. The US denied any such right had been conceded.

However the nature of deal maybe and without considering its fate in future, it helped to change few of the ideas. It was considered that Iran would never show any kind of flexibility in its viewpoint regarding its nuclear program but this agreement shows that some ice has melted in the bottom. There were two distinct groups working inside Iran in this regard; one was the hardliners who never trusted the West and always insisted to keep a strong tone in this regard. Former president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was also one of them and he always criticized the US and West for their dual behavior regarding the nuclear issues. It was due to the same inflexible attitude that the gap between Iran and the West kept increasing and so were the resultant sanctions on Iran. These sanctions badly affected the economy of Iran and life of a common man came under severe influence by all these. Along with this group, another group of pragmatists was also working that believed in better relations with the West so that Iran should prosper economically and the life standard of a common man should be elevated. The group believed in talks with the West regarding the nuclear issue and wanted to settle down on an agreement that should be in the interest of both the sides. But the hardliners had much influence on the supreme leader of Iran, Ayatullah Ali Khamenaie, who reserves the right of giving final word in all the affairs of state.

But the things started changing when Hassan Rouhani came into power in the general elections of August. In his election speeches, he promised people of bringing relief to the lives of common people by the way of negotiations and he was trusted by the people. As he came to power, series of talks started in which first two rounds were not successful while the third round of these talks in Geneva ended with this interim agreement. It was also revealed that the US and Iran had held a series of face-to-face talks in recent months that paved the way for the agreement but were kept secret even for their allies.

At least five meetings, involving Deputy Secretary of State William Burns, Vice President Joe Biden’s senior foreign policy adviser Jake Sullivan and Iranian officials, began in March at undisclosed locations, including the Gulf state of Oman, according to the Associated Press news agency. The final four meetings were held after President Rouhani was selected and these talks were personally authorized by President Obama, AP reports quoting senior US administration officials.

The result of these talks has given a new hope for the pragmatists in Iran while at the same time; it has silenced the hardliners who believed that nothing could have been achieved of these talks. Now the pragmatists will be able to carry out their efforts with more confidence and with increased support of people and the supreme leader.

Similarly, there were many in the Congress who believed in more and more sanctions and even a military operation to destroy Iran’s nuclear program while there was also present a group of Congressmen who believed in negotiations to settle the problem. This agreement has also given a new hope for the congressmen who believed in the power of negotiations while those believing in conflict have become silent for the time being.

Similarly, the views and tone of the supreme leader of Iran, Khamenaie seems to have changed against the West after the agreement was reached in Geneva.

Two crucial powers of the region, Iran and Saudi Arabia have many points against each other. Saudi Arabia is the prime sponsor of Sunni rebel groups of Syria fighting to bring down the Shia government of Bashar-al-Assad while Iran is the backer of Assad’s government and has sent its support in form of Hezbollah fighters who are fighting along with Assad’s forces against the rebels. A US-Iran rapprochement could require both parties to moderate their activities in Syria, an essential component of an end to the fighting.

Similarly, this may bring more stability in Lebanon where the conflicting interference of these two regional powers has jeopardized the stability in the country and in the region in general.

While this agreement has received a warm welcome in the world, Israel is also one of the few countries that seem to be unhappy of this. Israeli premiere has severely criticized it and termed as a chance to allow Iran to make nuclear weapon.

In general, this agreement would make positive effects on the economy of Iran and also some other countries of the region. It would also increase the faith of world in settling disputes with negotiations and dialogue.