Ms. Lincy seems more doubtful of a positive outcome of the nuclear talks. “We’re hearing more and more commentaries like the deadline may be extended, maybe the broad parameters of the deal would be decided, but more time would be needed for working out the technical aspects, we’ve heard this from Iranian officials, from Russian officials, we have not heard it from the US officials. It seems quite likely that there would be some sort of an extension”, she says, adding skeptically, “The talks are unlikely to come out with a big breakthrough. No one has that expectation; the idea is to figure out where things stand now and what needs to be done in the next six weeks”.

“We are close enough, but we have to keep pushing as hard as possible. Both sides have been at this for nearly ten years, and this is closest we got so we can’t give in now”, Mr. Collina insists. “We have to push ahead and have both sides to cooperate, to compromise and strike a deal”. On the other hand, Ms.Lincy ask the question “The talks have continued for already a decade now, and if Iran is not ready to make a fundamental decision that is required to meet the needs of the P5+1 side then what’s the purpose of the talks?”

Both experts agree that the sides have not yet reached an agreement because they cannot compromise on the conditions of the proposed nuclear deal. “What is holding up the breakthrough is uranium enrichment, the number of centrifuges Iran is allowed to continue to operate, and then the stockpile of the enriched uranium that will be allowed to keep in the country”, Ms.Lincy says. The other expert confirms that “the stumbling block is this issue how much nuclear capacity Iran should be allowed to keep. The two sides need to be flexible, and it is within reach, the both sides just need to compromise to get there”.

Mr. Collina also points out that the negotiators on both sides are subject to a lot of domestic pressure. “Many people in the United States do not want to trust Iran in that it does not want the nuclear weapon. But it is not a matter of trust, this negotiations is about getting a commitment from Iran and then verifying that commitment. And the question really is how much nuclear capacity Iran will be left with under the deal, how long the deal lasts and what are the terms. These things are controversial because some people don’t want Iran to have nuclear capacity, I think that Obama administration is willing to agree that Iran has some nuclear capacity, the question is how much. And, of course, Iran wants more” than Obama can give, the experts suggests. In her view, Ms. Lincy says that the problem is that both sides have yet to show signs of readiness to compromise. “It does not seem that the positions on the most intractable issues have really changed much, so it is not clear now what is going to happen between now and November, 24 and if a comprehensive deal can be reached by then. The US say that is it possible and they are focused on that deadline, but no details have emerged to support that possibility”, she says, adding that Iran may be interested in indefinite prolongation of talks as “there are a certain number of things that Iran is continuing to do as these talks continue: they are continuing to do research on more advanced centrifuges, they are continuing to produce low-enriched uranium, and there are 9,000 still operating centrifuges. We can’t advance the process of diplomacy if there no progress of these core issues”.

However, both experts agree international sanctions against Iran may spur Tehran’s readiness to strike a deal in November. “The West is offering sanctions relief, normalization, a lot of political and economic carrots that would be attractive to a lot of people in Iran“, Ms. Lincy suggests. Her viewpoint is supported by the opinion of Mr. Collina, who says that “the Western sanctions are hurting the Iranian economy enough that Iran wants relief from those. And Iran will also get from this deal, if it is concluded, a certain degree of acceptance in the international community”.

What the experts disagree upon is the importance of the deadline. Ms. Linsy, certain that both sides will miss the deadline of 24 November, insists that the idea of talks makes no sense if the negotiators haven't been able reach an agreement for almost 10 years. Mr. Collina, on his part, stands by the words of Russia’s Mr. Ryabkov, arguing that “definitely, getting a deal is more important than the date”.

Regarding the terms of the deal if it is concluded on 24 November, the experts say that it is still too early to make any assumptions, as the details of the agreement are still unknown. “I think a good deal would ease concerns, and a comprehensive deal would do that, so we’ll have to see what the details would be”, Ms. Linsy says. Mr. Collina also comes to a conclusion that the effectiveness of the deal “depends on what the terms are, and we don’t know that. It can be very effective in limiting Iran’s nuclear programme, reassuring the world that Iran is not going after the bomb and therefore defusing a very tense situation in the Middle East”.