Is an Iran nuclear deal on the horizon?

News outlets covering the talks are fretting over how much and when to report to our audience on the minutiae of such gruelling negotiations, writes Borzou Daragahi

As the old adage goes, ‘nothing is agreed until everything is agreed’ (AFP via Getty)

For the umpteenth time in two decades, Iran and world powers are on the verge of closing a nuclear deal that would ease sanctions on Iran, place constraints on Tehran’s atomic technology programme and, above all, lower security concerns, creating diplomatic breathing space in the most volatile region of the world. Or maybe they’re not.

One side or the other could be bluffing, pretending to be interested in a deal whilst working against one. Hardline political factions in Tehran or Washington could sabotage an agreement. Another Israeli assassination in Iran or a Yemeni Houthi drone attack in Saudi Arabia could scuttle the talks. And even if there is nothing dramatic, crucial remaining sticking points could prevent any deal. Negotiations could drag on for months, or conclude by the time you finish reading this piece. Or they could collapse at any moment.

As the old adage goes, “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”. And even after “everything is agreed”, when it comes to Middle East diplomacy, there’s always the chance a party could renege on the deal or some part of it.

News outlets covering the ongoing talks are constantly fretting over how much and when to report to our audience on the minutiae of such gruelling negotiations. Should we cover it painstakingly, publishing a story whenever a key player makes a statement or a diplomat leaks a self-serving tidbit about the talks? Should we wait until a big development breaks? Shall we write a preview story ahead of the big signing ceremony, only to have to walk back the narrative if there is a surprise obstacle? Or should we just wait until the ink is dried on the final statement and the parties shake hands before wrapping up a story?

And how much detail and background should each piece include? Do readers need a quick refresher on the broader points of uranium enrichment and the uses of heavy-water reactors? Should we just avoid the nerdy science stuff and focus on the political and geopolitical implications?

All these factors come into play when editors and reporters decide when and how much to cover a subject as important but potentially tedious and incremental as the effort to restore the Iran nuclear deal. We want to keep our audience well informed. But we also don’t want to bore you – and yes, even ourselves – with incessant articles that say the same thing. And we are constantly talking amongst ourselves about how to strike the right balance.

Yours,

Borzou Daragahi

International correspondent