Trust and Fairness: Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear (JCPOA) Negotiations

The document analyzes the ethical dilemmas of trust and fairness during the JCPOA negotiations (2013-2015). It argues that while deep-seated distrust between the US and Iran initially hindered progress, a shift in US policy and the efforts of second-tier negotiators helped build a 'minimal' level of trust necessary for a procedurally fair agreement. However, the authors contend that the use of threats and sanctions undermines this trust, and the decision to limit the agreement's scope for short-term success may have jeopardized its long-term sustainability, as evidenced by the US withdrawal in 2018.

• Trust and perceptions of procedural fairness are mutually reinforcing; in the JCPOA process, building trust allowed parties to view the negotiations as fair, which in turn fostered further trust.
• Threats and sanctions act as central hindrances to the emergence of trust and can make it difficult or impossible to rebuild trust once damaged, creating an imbalance in negotiations that is hard to counter-balance.
• A critical turning point in the JCPOA negotiations was the US shift from a policy of "zero enrichment in Iran" to a "no nuclear weapons in Iran" stance, which signaled to Iran that the US accepted the peaceful use of nuclear materials.
• Second-tier negotiators and 'scientific diplomacy'—specifically the technical interactions between physicists like Ali Akbar Salehi and Ernest Moniz—were essential in building the foundational trust required for first-tier leaders to reach an agreement.
• The decision to maintain a narrow focus on nuclear issues to ensure a short-term agreement (a 'limited settlement') risked long-term sustainability by alienating domestic elites who viewed the omission of other issues, such as Iran's missile programme, as unfair.
• Mediators, specifically Oman and the European Union, played a vital role in facilitating direct and indirect communication between the US and Iran after a prolonged period of diplomatic severance.

APA

Reichberg, G. M., & Stollenwerk, E. (n.d.). Trust and Fairness: Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear (JCPOA) Negotiations. Peace Research Institute Oslo. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/6241a1bc-3a71-472c-8b83-52df457ba5a7/Reichberg and Stollenwerk - Trust and Fairness Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear JCPOA Negotiations - FAIR Case Brief 8.pdf?inline=true

Chicago

Reichberg, Gregory M., and Eric Stollenwerk. Trust and Fairness: Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear (JCPOA) Negotiations. Peace Research Institute Oslo, n.d. https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/6241a1bc-3a71-472c-8b83-52df457ba5a7/Reichberg and Stollenwerk - Trust and Fairness Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear JCPOA Negotiations - FAIR Case Brief 8.pdf?inline=true.

Wikipedia

{{cite report |last1=Reichberg |first1=Gregory M. |last2=Stollenwerk |first2=Eric |title=Trust and Fairness: Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear (JCPOA) Negotiations |publisher=Peace Research Institute Oslo |url=https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/6241a1bc-3a71-472c-8b83-52df457ba5a7/Reichberg and Stollenwerk - Trust and Fairness Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear JCPOA Negotiations - FAIR Case Brief 8.pdf?inline=true |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}

BibTeX

@techreport{reichbergndtrust, author = {Reichberg, Gregory M. and Stollenwerk, Eric}, title = {{Trust and Fairness: Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear (JCPOA) Negotiations}}, institution = {Peace Research Institute Oslo}, url = {https://cdn.cloud.prio.org/files/6241a1bc-3a71-472c-8b83-52df457ba5a7/Reichberg and Stollenwerk - Trust and Fairness Ethical Dilemmas in the Iran Nuclear JCPOA Negotiations - FAIR Case Brief 8.pdf?inline=true}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }