• am
  • ru
  • en
print version
26.01.2006

Iran: new developments on nuclear program

   

Sevak Sarukhanyan 

As the Iranian authorities have repeatedly threatened, on the 9th of January 2006 was resumed work at Esfahan nuclear research center and on the 10th of January at Natanz uranium enrichment center. This step made by Tehran intensified the relations on Iran’s nuclear program, which will not slack until the first special session of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors.

The work at Esfahan’s and Natanz’s nuclear center, more precisely its main part, was frozen according to the agreement concluded among Iran and “European trio” in the face of Germany, Great Britain, and France in autumn 2004. The latter one supposes that the suspension of Iranian nuclear research would foster Iran and EU to work out the main directions of Iran’s peaceful nuclear program development, excluding the researches of military significance. At the same time the EU commits itself to offer Iran a big package of trade and economic cooperation, which would compensate the after-effects of Iranian certain nuclear objects’ activities suspension.

It’s worth mentioning that in spite of the fact that the Iranians are dissatisfied with the offers made by Europe, but from economic and technological standpoint five years ago Iran even couldn’t dream of such offers made by the EU. For example, the EU member states spoke about their readiness to take part in the construction of Iran’s nuclear reactors, to guarantee the supply of fuel for the constructed nuclear reactors, and to develop all the directions of nuclear technologies which may be peacefully used.

In 1980-1990s Iran has repeatedly turned to the European countries with suchlike offers of cooperation; however all of them refused to cooperate with Iran mainly under the US pressure. But today the US can not exert such pressure on the EU as it used to do 5 or 10 years ago. It is mainly conditioned by Iraqi crisis which proved that the US and the EU members France and German have different approaches to political and energy perspectives in the Middle East. In this context Europeans began making braver steps in Iran.

In the context of Iraqi war and crisis Iran’s regional condition was also changed. Iran has gained an opportunity to carry out a more mobile and self assured regional policy. In 2004 Iran easily entered into negotiations with the EU as it was not clear that the US would get deeper in Iraqi problem. In this context the disclosure of the secret part of the Iranian nuclear program could result the US military actions against Iran. The possibility of such turn of affairs was more often discussed in 2003/2004 then now when the crisis on the Iranian nuclear program seems to have reached to its culminating point.

However Iran has resumed its uranium enrichment researches in quite complicated inner and foreign political circumstances. This fact has caused alarm among the international community as well as Russia and China who have always supported Iran’s nuclear rights in international negotiations and structures.

On the 12th of January 2006 was held a conference on Iranian nuclear program’s developments in Berlin with the participation of the foreign ministers of “European trio”. After the negotiations were over, the journalists represented their decision: to raise the issue of handing over the Iranian nuclear program to UN Security Council at the coming session of IAEA Board of Governors.

At the same time UN Secretary General Kofi Annan appeared with an announcement that Iran is ready to continue negotiations with “European trio”. This announcement was made after the telephone conversation with the Secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council Ali Larijani. It’s worth mentioning that Annan considered it more appropriate to refer the matter to IAEA Board of Governors and turn to UN Security Council only as a last resort.

In spite of the decision made by Europeans, today there is no legal basis reasoning UN Security Council’s accusation of Iran’s actions. Reopening its nuclear enrichment centers Iran doesn’t violate the non-proliferation treaty terms which promotes co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear technology and equal access to this technology for all states parties both in extracting uranium and its enrichment.

Today there isn’t any legal document restricting Iran’s nuclear researches. “European trio” also “respects” Iran’s nuclear rights and well grounds its condemnations to Iran on political and moral basis and not on the legal one.

Taking into consideration the fact that according to K. Annan Iran expressed willingness to resume negotiations with “European trio” on nuclear program, on condition they don’t last too long, a few scenarios of development are possible in the near future.

1. IAEA Board of Governors condemns Iran led policy on nuclear issue, however, taking into consideration the Iranians’ willingness to continue discussions, certain period of time is given to resume and finish the negotiations. If the negotiations end up successfully, it is possible:

a) To sustain uranium enrichment activities in Iran and reach an agreement to build a joint venture plant in Russian territory to enrich uranium.

b) To reach agreement on trade-economic, political and technologic cooperation between Iran-EU resulting the Europeans active participation in Iranian peaceful nuclear program developing.

2. IAEA Board of Governors denounces Iranian nuclear program and hands over Iranian “dossier” to UN Security Council for discussions. The most difficult problem here is that there is no legal grounding to impose sanctions against Iran in case it hasn’t violated non-proliferation treaty.

Another important problem is which sanctions should be imposed against Iran for the latter to comply with the international community’s demands on limiting its nuclear researches. The sanctions, which will probably refer to oil sectors, may influence on Iran’s behavior but may result negatively both on Iran’s and international economy. These sanctions may first of all damage China, which imports a great quantity of Iranian oil, as well as on the US energy security, which also acquires a great quantity of Iranian oil from Dubai through its mediator companies. There is a big probability that UN Security Council will prohibit UN member states to cooperate with Iran in high technology field and will impose some restrictions on trade cooperation with Iran. However, such restrictions will have little influence on the farther development of the military part of Iran’s nuclear program, as this part, together with uranium enrichment activates, are realized without the cooperation of any foreign state. Iran has long ago bought the technologies necessary for the whole enrichment cycle from Pakistan’s nuclear bomb “father” Abdul Qadir Khan and his people. The Iranian trade-economic boycott regime can’t but influence on the regional countries, most of which have established important trade-economic cooperation with Iran.

3. UN Security Council condemns non-transparency of Iran’s nuclear program but doesn’t impose any sanction against Iran. Instead it establishes an interim structure like UN Special Committee which undertakes the responsibility of a new phase of negotiations with Iran. The efficiency of this structure depends on what kind of package of offers will be brought up for discussion for peaceful handling of the crisis. In addition to EU proposed trade-economic and technological cooperation and Russia-Iran uranium enrichment joint venture brought forward by Russia, UN should also come up with the offers of political importance for tackling this issue. More precisely, Iran must be given security guaranties be UN Security Council’s members.

Such guarantees by UN indirectly suppose the same to be done by the US. Yet, such guarantees provided by the US are connected not only with solving Iran’s nuclear problem but also with such problems as human rights and terrorism. From this standpoint the change in US approach to provide guarantees may be conditioned only by the situation’s hopelessness. However, US hasn’t given up the alternative as well as military solution scenarios of the Iranian issue yet.

The scenarios represented above don’t restrict the other possible ways of the situation’s development. At the same time it should be pointed out that Iran’s nuclear crisis has reached to its diplomatic highlight and the two possible solutions of the problem may be either by peaceful or military means with unpredictable outcomes.


Return
Another materials of author