• Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Global logoCarnegie lettermark logo
DemocracyIran
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Karim Sadjadpour"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
    "Malcolm H. Kerr Carnegie Middle East Center"
  ],
  "collections": [
    "Iranian Proliferation"
  ],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "menaTransitions",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "MEP",
  "programs": [
    "Middle East"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "Middle East",
    "Iran"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Political Reform",
    "Foreign Policy",
    "Nuclear Policy"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Iran’s Nuclear Program

The ongoing nuclear negotiations with Iran face significant obstacles, including domestic politics in Iran and the opposition of the hardliners.

Link Copied
By Karim Sadjadpour
Published on Mar 31, 2015
Program mobile hero image

Program

Middle East

The Middle East Program in Washington combines in-depth regional knowledge with incisive comparative analysis to provide deeply informed recommendations. With expertise in the Gulf, North Africa, Iran, and Israel/Palestine, we examine crosscutting themes of political, economic, and social change in both English and Arabic.

Learn More

Source: Charlie Rose

Speaking on Charlie Rose, Carnegie’s Karim Sadjadpour explained that in the ongoing nuclear negotiations, Iran feels confident that the United States wants the deal more and if there is an impasse, Iran will not be blamed for it. Instead, Netanyahu and the U.S. Congress are likely to be blamed.

Still, he said, the negotiations are likely  lead to “some type of a framework agreement,” but it will not be as concrete as some may hope for. While the negotiations are on technical issues, the result will come down to a political decision by Iran’s Supreme Leader. He added that it is an “economic no brainer” for Iran to sign the deal, but as the Supreme Leader has been saying for decades that American cannot be trusted, the deal will represent a political risk to the Iranian leadership.

Sadjadpour statated that the challenge in dealing with Iran “is that those Iranian officials who are accessible to us … are not powerful and those Iranian officials who are powerful are inaccessible to us.” He explained that there is a division within the Iranian leadership. Pragmatists want to model China: they do not want to relinquish power but instead open the country up economically. Hardliners, on the other hand say, look at what happened to Gorbachev when he opened up the Soviet Union. When one abandons their ideals, the worry, the entire house could collapse. Sadjadpour concluded that while most of the Iranian public would support the pragmatists, the hardliners have the ability to coerce the population and they feel threatened by opening up the country as they believe it is easier to run Iran in isolation. 

This interview was originally aired on Charlie Rose.

About the Author

Karim Sadjadpour

Senior Fellow, Middle East Program

Karim Sadjadpour is a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, where he focuses on Iran and U.S. foreign policy toward the Middle East.

    Recent Work

  • Q&A
    What’s Keeping the Iranian Regime in Power—for Now

      Aaron David Miller, Karim Sadjadpour, Robin Wright

  • Q&A
    How Washington and Tehran Are Assessing Their Next Steps

      Aaron David Miller, David Petraeus, Karim Sadjadpour

Karim Sadjadpour
Senior Fellow, Middle East Program
Karim Sadjadpour
Political ReformForeign PolicyNuclear PolicyMiddle EastIran

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

  • Article
    Continental Asia and the Rise of Portfolio Politics

    “Central Asia” as an analytical category is itself part of the problem. The term is a Soviet administrative inheritance, drawn along lines that served the convenience of Moscow. The Central Asian states the Soviets named no longer see themselves through this category alone and are not aligning across political blocs but are instead building external partnerships sector by sector, assigning different partners to different functions.

      Jennifer B. Murtazashvili

  • Article
    Palestine’s Climate Change Planning Faces Its Limits

    Barriers ranging from weak legal frameworks to ongoing, occupation-related limitations are constraining Palestine from achieving its ambitious climate targets.

      Joy Arkeh, Nabil Nasser

  • Commentary
    Diwan
    Corrupted by Absolute Power

    In an interview, Marc Lynch discusses his new book decrying the post-1990 U.S.-dominated order in the Middle East.

      Michael Young

  • Tiananmen Gate with US and Chinese flags
    Commentary
    Emissary
    Trump and Xi Should Tackle a Previously Impossible AI Conversation

    Previous dialogues ended in failure. This time could be different.

      Scott Singer

  • Trump and others walking down a red carpet, with Air Force One in the background
    Commentary
    Emissary
    “China Doesn’t Do Anything for Free”

    Why the outcomes of the U.S.-China meetings may be limited.


      Aaron David Miller, David Rennie

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
Carnegie global logo, stacked
1779 Massachusetts Avenue NWWashington, DC, 20036-2103Phone: 202 483 7600
  • Research
  • Emissary
  • About
  • Experts
  • Donate
  • Programs
  • Events
  • Blogs
  • Podcasts
  • Contact
  • Annual Reports
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Government Resources
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.