Tehran, July 2, The Iran Project - In the current tough days Iran and its negotiating partners continue holding separate meetings to hammer out the detailed final accord which would end nearly a decade of impasse over Tehran's civilian nuclear program.

Meanwhile, the diplomats extend the self-imposed June 30 deadline to July 7, since a number of gaps and issues have remained to be discussed. Nobody doubts that the parties have spent many years settling the nuclear dispute and have achieved major progress so far. However, as the negotiations missed the June 30 deadline, the question is how far it still needs to go? Is 7 days enough to reach an accord?

What constitute failure?

While many analysts focus on what would constitute a "good deal", there could be some arguments about how the nuclear negotiations lead to frailer. It seems that apart from technical complexities as any other dispute settlement, there are few factors which put this particular deal at risk. At this crucial phase, which both sides are required to make tough decisions, frequent extensions, any decision not to sign the final deal and the fundamental changes in the principal agreements made so far may pave the way for the failure in achieving the comprehensive deal or kill any chance to reach it. The truth is that this is the time for both parties to make the fundamental decisions, since as the time goes making difficult choices for all sides wouldn't get any easier. But what are the key challenges facing the parties in their struggle for the final decision-making?

The sources of pressure

In Iran, the supreme leader, Ayatollah Khamenei has explicitly elaborated what sort of deal is acceptable while stressing redlines and policies. He has maintained that "we want the cruel sanctions be removed, of course, we accept to give some points in return but on the condition that the nuclear industry is not halted or harmed." Although there are a range of opponents in Iran, who mostly worry that the ongoing negotiation doesn�t preserve the nation nuclear rights, the supreme leader has frequently supported both the negotiators and negotiation team. Thus, the only internal source of pressure in Iran is usually mollified by the Supreme Leader's remarks. But on the US side, the issue seems far more complicated.

In US, Obama administration, as a responsible to handle the negotiations, deals with pressure from several sources, either inside or outside the country. The US congress, Israel and the Arabs are the highly visible skeptics of the nuclear negotiations, and hence they have made it a formidable challenge to Obama administration to calm their worries and fears. Given the multiple sources of pressure exerted on the US government, the notion that the US and Western allies are doubtful in final decision-making, seems far more understandable.

Failing to strike a deal between Iran and the six powers has numerous consequences and one of them is certainly the sanctions' regime collapse. This may be no longer respected particularly by the countries such as Russia and China, as they already have cooperated with Iran to break this dame. In addition, the history of sanctions against Iran provided undeniable evidence that this as a punishment will be inefficient to its Western architects.

In conclusion, passing the deadline sharpens the pressure that the negotiating parties face from both opponents and proponents of a possible agreement.�But they have to overcome the pressure and decide, although it doesn't necessarily mean that the negotiators strike a deal for the sake of having a deal.