Iran-US Talks Show Signs of Progress, Analyst Says
In an interview with Radio Nationale, political analyst and writer Boulbeba Salem dissected two burning issues: the Iran-US negotiations, which he believes are showing tangible signs of progress under Russian guarantees, and the Malian crisis, which he sees as a ruthless competition between great powers for strategic control of Africa.
Iran-US Talks: A Notable Progress
Salem notes that the indirect talks between Washington and Tehran have made significant progress. He observes that Trump's statements serve as a barometer: conciliatory when there are breakthroughs, threatening when there are setbacks. He places particular emphasis on the efforts of Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, who has visited Pakistan, Oman, and Moscow. The reception in Oman is significant, as this country, which shares with Iran the management of the Strait of Hormuz and has the best relations with Tehran in the Gulf, could play a role in regulating this critical passage in the future. Oman had previously served as a mediator in a previous cycle, before Washington unilaterally ended it.
Russian Guarantees: A Key Factor
Salem sees the reception of Araghchi by Putin in Moscow, after a meeting with Lavrov, as proof that sensitive issues require guarantees at the highest level, and that Iran is seeking to make Russia the guarantor of any potential agreement.
Three Non-Negotiable Iranian Demands
Salem identifies three points of contention: Iran's sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz, the lifting of the US naval blockade that Tehran considers piracy, and the nuclear dossier, which includes the issue of enriched uranium and the lifting of sanctions. He adds that Iran refuses to negotiate with Trump's envoys, Witkoff and Kushner, suspected of defending Israeli positions rather than American ones, a view shared by the political scientist John Mearsheimer. Tehran would prefer to negotiate directly with Vice President JD Vance, perceived as less favorable to military action.
The Malian Crisis: A Rivalry Between Great Powers
Salem recalls that Trump engaged the US in this conflict without Congressional approval, and then requested $200 billion from the Treasury to finance it. He highlights that, except for the pro-Israel lobby, the entire American political class opposes the conflict, considering it to be in no national interest and no direct threat from Iran.
Mali: A Rivalry Between Great Powers
On the Malian issue, Salem identifies two actors behind the attacks in the north of the country: the National Movement for the Liberation of Azawad, a Tuareg-led movement implanted in Tombouctou, Gao, and Kidal, and the jihadist group "Jamaat Nusrat al-Islam wal-Muslimin," affiliated with Al-Qaeda. These two forces, antagonistic on an ideological level, have allied themselves against the regime of President Goïta, in power since the 2020 coup.
The Algerian Accord: A Line of Fracture
Salem recalls that in 2023, Goïta abandoned the Algerian Accord of 2015, negotiated under the auspices of Algeria and the United Nations to ease tensions between the country's multiple components. He sees this as a grave signal, directly responsible for the current deterioration. He cites the example of the downing of a Malian drone by the Algerian army about a year ago, indicating that regional powers are seeking to destabilize Algeria from its southern borders.
The Sahel Region: A Rivalry Between Great Powers
Salem describes the Sahel region, comprising Mali, Niger, and Burkina Faso, as a space of rivalry between great powers. Recent coups have ended French predominance, replaced by a Russian military presence via Wagner. He affirms that extremist groups are regularly instrumentalized by external economic interests, and links the Israeli approach in Somalia to this same logic: after the closure of the Bab-el-Mandeb by the Houthis, Israel is seeking a foothold near the Gulf of Aden via the recognition of Somali separatist groups.
Conclusion: A Warning on the Consequences of Malian Instability
Salem concludes by warning of the repercussions of Malian instability for North Africa: economic crisis, explosive ethnic and religious diversity, and armed groups supported from outside. If the situation degenerates into civil war, the migratory pressure towards Algeria, Tunisia, and Morocco would become uncontrollable, he believes. He places his hopes in Algeria, the only regional actor with the necessary networks of influence.
