At each stage of the Iranian nuclear negotiations the luxury hotel venues have grown steadily posher. The Beau-Rivage Palace Hotel in Lausanne represents a new peak. An imposing edifice on the banks of Lake Geneva, crammed with solid marble and surrounded by sprawling lawns, it is where the Treaty of Lausanne was signed in 1923, marking the final death rites for the Ottoman Empire and defining the borders of modern Turkey.

The accord being negotiated here 92 years later has the chance to be just as historic, albeit in completely different ways. It could determine the future spread of nuclear weapons, redefine relations between nuclear weapon states and their non-nuclear challengers. It could also mark the start of a new era in Iran’s relationship with the West.

Given the stakes, as well as the length (18 months on and off) and the intensity of the talks, diplomats here argue that the splendour and comfort of the surroundings are appropriate. And if you think diplomacy is expensive, they add, try military conflict. The combined hotel bills are little more than the cost of a single cruise missile.

On the other hand, the investment of time, money and effort could still come to naught if the negotiations in Lausanne fall short. The deadline for a framework agreement is the end of the month and while the differences between the parties here are narrowing, it is unclear whether they are narrowing fast enough.

This is what we know about the state of the talks: The long-running struggle over Iran’s uranium enrichment capacity over the lifetime of a deal appears to have been resolved with a compromise equivalent to between 6,000 and 8,000 of its current model of centrifuges. The stockpile of Iran’s low enriched uranium will be reduced from thousands of kilograms to hundreds of kilograms. The deal’s duration seems likely to be 10 years although some of the restrictions on Iran will last 15 years.

The outstanding differences involve sanctions and Iran’s capability to carry out nuclear industry research and development over the lifetime of a deal. On R & D, the US would like to put strict restrictions on Iranian work on developing new centrifuges. Iran says that is a recipe for perpetual dependence on foreign powers.

The gulf over sanctions is broader and deeper. The Iranian delegation, led by foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, want all UN Security Council sanctions linked to Iran’s nuclear programme lifted at the outset of any agreement. The government in Tehran needs to have something immediate, substantive as well as symbolic to show for sacrificing hard-won nuclear infrastructure. The US and its allies are offering to lift only some UN sanctions, along with the EU oil embargo. They are aware that, given the state of East-West relations, once all UN sanctions are lifted they will be near-impossible to re-impose if things go wrong.

A senior US administration official said: “We believe that sanctions relief has to come in a phased way as Iran undertakes its commitments so that it would be more of a step-by-step process.”

The Iranians have been publicly optimistic in Lausanne. Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the country’s atomic energy organisation, declared that 90% of the technical issues had been resolved leaving only one major area of disagreement (thought to be a reference to the R & D issue). Zarif is said to be somewhat less confident. The Americans are cautious, wary of raising expectations. A senior administration said:

This is a bit of a roller-coaster of a negotiation in the sense that one day you may feel, gosh, we might actually get there, and the next day you might feel or maybe the next hour you might feel, well, maybe not so much. So that’s why it is very difficult and very challenging and why one moment you may think that we’re rather pessimistic and another moment we are a little bit more hopeful.

It had been hoped that the current session in Lausanne would be the last of this diplomatic marathon. But there is now talk about the possibility of reconvening next week for a dramatic last few days before the end-March deadline. Much will depend on how solid the negotiators believe that deadline to be. If they feel it can be pushed back they will not bring their final offers to the table. It is a self-imposed deadline, agreed in November by the foreign ministers of the negotiating states (Iran, US, UK, France, Germany, Russia and China). They gave themselves until the end of June to fill in all the details.

Meanwhile, however, time is running politically. Congress gave the Obama administration until March 24 before passing new sanctions. The White House probably has a little longer. Congress goes into recess three days after that deadline until April 13. But when the Republican majority comes back they will surely be in an combative mood, and emboldened by the victory of their closest foreign ally, Binyamin Netanyahu, defying expectations and the polls. If there is no deal by mid-April, Congress will unleash new sanctions and the window for talks could close definitively.



Even if there is a framework deal here, it will come under withering fire from Netanyahu and Congress. Its best hope of survival is for Obama to keep it alive in Washington until the end of his term in 22 months time. By then, it is hoped, it will have demonstrably defused tensions in the Gulf and kept Iran at least a year away from even the capacity to make a nuclear warhead. Obama’s successor, even a Republican, would not be able to throw all that away.