The recent approval of a gas deal between Iran and Pakistan in late January 2013 by the Pakistani Cabinet has undoubtedly put an end to all doubts and speculations which have been rife during the past two decades about the implementation of the project. The plan to export the Iranian natural gas to the Indian Subcontinent kicked off in early 1990s with the discovery of huge natural gas reserves in Iran’s South Pars region in 1988.

As the public announcement goes, the new round of nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers will be held in the Kazakh city of Almaty on February 26, 2013. Before negotiations get underway, it would be helpful to mention a few points which would clearly show how the Iranian side looks upon the negotiations in their totality.

With the next round of nuclear talks between Iran and the P5+1 world powers group just days away, Asia Society brought together Iran's highest-ranking official in the United States, Ambassador to the United Nations Mohammad Khazaee, and former U.S. Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Thomas Pickering to discuss breaking the nuclear impasse and the future of U.S.-Iran relations.

The period of time from negotiations between Iran and the P5+1 group of world powers over Tehran’s nuclear energy program in Moscow in June 2012, and the forthcoming round of talks which is scheduled to be held in the Kazakh city of Almaty on February 26, 2013, has been characterized by a heap of political developments. A review of those developments will help analysts better understand the situation of Iran and the P5+1 – including the United States, Britain, France, Russia, and China plus Germany – in the forthcoming negotiations in Almaty.

The main point which was overshadowed by the hue and cry of the assassination was the lack of any evidence to prove the charges leveled against the Islamist figures by their opponents. It is quite understandable that under such circumstances, the public opinion relies less on rationality and more on sentiments, but adoption of such an approach by the political elite and parties cannot be taken lightly. 

As a usual procedure of the past few years, whenever Iran and the six world powers known as the P5+1 group are scheduled to start a new round of negotiations, Western media try to create media hype in order to make negotiations difficult for the Iranian delegation and therefore achieve their objectives in an atmosphere of “media intimidation.” 

Despite all the problems and the crisis with which the Arab country is currently grappling, and although a large number of high-ranking army officers have deserted and joined the opposition, the main body of the army and the country’s military personnel is still loyal to the government. This is probably the most important reason behind the survival of Assad’s government. 

During the past few months, a number of important events have taken place in the Middle East and the world which prove that political players are more willing to exercise moderateness and avoid extremism.

The fabric of the Syrian population as well as the quality of the country’s ongoing unrest which encompasses a wide spectrum of ethnic and religious conflicts in addition to dissimilar positions taken by regional and transregional players involved in the crisis have turned Syria situation into a major seismic fault line. This fault line is so profound and serious that other regional and even transregional crises have been activated along its course.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is totally and completely sure that accusations against it in AMIA case have been cooked up by Israel and this has been unwavering conviction of the Islamic establishment about this issue throughout the past years.