Domestic politics and a June election could make the difference in how
Iran addresses its main dilemma of the coming year: whether to
compromise on its nuclear program or maintain a policy of defiance.
Iran
is slated to elect a new president amid deep political divisions and
rivalries among conservative factions. The issues at the heart of Iran's
standoff with the West -- the country's economy, its isolation and
security -- will likely dominate the campaign.
The contest for power will pit candidates seen as loyal to
Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei against those associated with
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The main reformist parties said they
would boycott the elections.
The discord is on daily display in Iranian media, with
prominent political figures blaming one another for an economy withering
from international sanctions and years of mismanagement, with a
plummeting currency and skyrocketing inflation.
For Iran,
maintaining the status quo with the West could invite additional
sanctions and a possible military strike by Israel to prevent the
country from building a nuclear weapon. Iran says its nuclear program is solely for peaceful energy purposes.
Mr. Ahmadinejad's opponents say he and his administration have
mismanaged the economy and challenged the will of Mr. Khamenei, who has
the last word on all state matters. In November, Mr. Ahmadinejad
ruffled some feathers when he said the nuclear impasse would be resolved
only through direct negotiations with the U.S. Washington has said it
was ready for such discussions.
In Iran, the idea is gaining momentum that talks between Iran and the U.S. must proceed in parallel to Iran's
nuclear negotiations with the five permanent members of the U.N.
Security Council plus Germany, analysts say. Both sides in those
so-called P5+1 talks have indicated a timetable will be set to meet
again in 2013, after talks stagnated in 2012.
Iran's
goal, some analysts say, is a grand bargain that recognizes its right
to enrich uranium, lays out steps toward relief of sanctions and
addresses concerns such as a possible military strike by Israel, a stake
in a post-Assad Syria and assurances that the U.S. isn't plotting for
regime change in Tehran.
"In Iran, many people are realizing that nothing will move forward until
Iran
and the U.S. sit down and discuss their issues. Mr. Khamenei is not
opposed to these talks in principle, but he needs reassurances that the
U.S. won't meddle in Iran's internal affairs," said Seyed Hossein
Mousavian, who was part of Iran's nuclear negotiating team until 2005
and is currently a visiting scholar at Princeton University.
On the other hand, Tehran has built a legacy of anti-Western
rhetoric, and any concessions could diminish its stature at home and
among its proxies abroad, specifically Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in
Gaza. Mr. Khamenei will consider a compromise only if he feels there is
sufficient unity and stability inside the regime so that Iran doesn't look weak, analysts say.
To that end, the regime will be focused on getting through
June's presidential elections with minimum turmoil, after the
demonstrations that followed the 2009 election and the regional
uprisings of the Arab Spring.
Mr. Ahmadinejad, who is ineligible to run for re-election,
could be another obstacle to progress in nuclear negotiations: The
regime, analysts say, is wary of giving the credit and legacy of a
political breakthrough with the West to a controversial, lame-duck
president.
The president's conservative detractors hope to clip his wings
out of fear that he aims to overstep Mr. Khamenei's powers. Mr.
Ahmadinejad's allies have fought back with smear campaigns aimed at
discrediting heavyweight pragmatic figures, such as former President Ali
Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who are trying to influence Mr. Khamenei to
strike a nuclear deal.