Nuclear Resolution Set To Widen Divisions Over Iran

France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States have been discussing a possible resolution censuring Tehran at the quarterly board meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency, while China and Russia have warned this could upset negotiations over reviving the 2015 Iran nuclear agreement.

The most contentious part of Grossi’s report referred to the discovery of uranium traces at three sites in Iran linked to nuclear work carried out before 2003.

“Iran has not provided explanations that are technically credible in relation to the Agency’s findings at three undeclared locations in Iran,” he said. “Nor has Iran informed the Agency of the current location, or locations, of the nuclear material and/or of the equipment contaminated with nuclear material, that was moved from Turquzabad in 2018.”

Grossi told the board – which meets from today until June 10 – that he could not confirm Iran’s adherence to its ‘safeguards agreement’ as a signatory of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty “unless and until” Tehran provided “technically credible explanations for the presence of uranium particles of anthropogenic origin at Turquzabad, Varamin and ‘Marivan’ and informs the Agency of all current locations of the nuclear material and/or of the contaminated equipment.”

While these issues do not directly relate to talks to restore the 2015 agreement, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), they are seen by the US and three European states as a crucial issue of Iran’s credibility.

100%

‘Technical’ issues

Iran quickly rejected Grossi’s speech to the agency board. Foreign Ministry spokesman Saeed Khatibzadeh said the IAEA chief had made a “hurried response” with his report. “We had planned a third round of discussions but he didn’t wait,” the spokesman said, adding that any resolution would “impact negatively on cooperation with the IAEA and on the nuclear talks.”

Mohammad Eslami, head of the Atomic Energy Agency of Iran, told al-Jazeera television that Iran had given “very precise answers” to the IAEA. According to an agreement reached by Grossi in early March, Tehran was required to give written replies by March 20 and satisfy the agency over any queries by June 21.

Iran, China and Russia have all argued that questions arising from Iran’s pre-2003 nuclear work are ‘technical’ and should not derail ‘political’ efforts to revive the JCPOA, from which President Donald Trump withdrew the US in 2018, imposing ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions that prompted Iran after 2019 to expand its nuclear program beyond JCPOA limits.

Majority vote

While in the past welcoming the ‘technical’ role of the IAEA, Tehran criticized last week’s trip by Grossi to Israel, which is not an NPT signatory and which is the only nuclear-armed Middle East state. Iran’s English-language outlet Press TV accused Grossi and Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett of “collusion,” and contrasted Israel’s secret nuclear arsenal with Iran facing extensive IAEA inspections.

Any vote at the IAEA board on a resolution critical of Iran will be made by a simple majority of the 35 members, but a referral to the United Nations Security Resolution would be in different circumstances to 2005-6 when Russia and China voted for international sanctions at the UNSC.

Grossi told the board the IAEA was open to continued dialogue with Iran to resolve all issues. “As in the past, and in order for the agency to be in a position to provide assurance that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively peaceful, the agency remains ready to re-engage without delay with Iran to resolve these matters,” he said.

Grossi told a press briefing: “These issues will not go away.”

Ynet reported on Saturday that Kamran Mollapour, who was reportedly working at Natanz nuclear facility in central Iran, has died but it did not confirm or reject the possibility of assassination. 

Despite Iranian some social media reports about Mollapour’s death, no Iranian official, state media or a source close to the alleged victim have mentioned it.

Conflicting reports are still circulating about the death of Iranian aerospace scientist Ayoob Entezari -- who held a PhD in mechanical and aerospace engineering -- with some calling it an assassination and government saying he died of food poisoning. 

Late in May, an explosion in one of the research centers at Iran’s Parchin military complex near the capital Tehran killed engineer Ehsan Ghadbeigi and injured another employee. 

A few days earlier, Iranian government and IRGC media confirmed the death of Colonel Ali Esmailzadeh also from the Quds Force, saying he died “in an incident in recent days” at his home without mentioning any details after Iran International quoted sources in Iran as saying that the IRGC killed him over suspicions of espionage. 

He was a close colleague of Colonel Hassan Sayyad-Khodaei, the acting commander of the elite Qods Unit 840, who was earlier shot dead behind the wheel of his car outside his home in Tehran on May 22. The sources said that the IRGC became suspicious that Esmailzadeh divulged information about his colleague and decided to eliminate him. 

Former diplomat Fereydoun Majlesi offered Etemad Online a pessimistic assessment on Sunday [June 5]. "There is no hope in the nuclear negotiations to revive the JCPOA," he said, adding that everything is working against Iran and that Israel utterly threatens Tehran with air strikes on its nuclear sites.

Majlesi reminded that Israel has said war against the Islamic Republic will no longer remain limited to Israel and the areas at its borders and from now on it will strike the very country where threats emanate from.

In the meantime, Etemad Online observed that US State Department Spokesman Ned Price has said that an agreement might be within reach only if Iran gives up its maximalist positions. This is while Tehran repeats its demands and Iran watchers predict hard days ahead for Tehran.

Majlesi told Etemad Online that those responsible for the negotiations are taking it toward a "final solution" in which there is no hope for any positive result from the negotiations. "The group who wishes for the annihilation of Israel through jihad appear to be approaching a serious operational point," Majlesi said. He reiterated that the final solution means war and bloodshed.

100%

On the other hand, former lawmaker Mehrdad Lahouti says that there is a will in the Iranian government to make the negotiations fruitful and to lift the sanctions. Lahouti said he believes the talks will bear fruit as Iran is determined to secure an agreement with the United States, and President Joe Biden badly needs the agreement while Europeans can save face by being involved in a deal that reduces tension.

Lahouti told Nameh News that unlike what most people believe, the final decision-maker in Iran is not the Raisi Administration. He added that even under former president Hassan Rouhani in 2015, it was the “political order” that supported the deal and made sure that it was completed.

"Political order" is a jargon used by Islamic Republic officials to refer to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. "That was how the Iranian parliament managed to approve the deal [JCPOA] within 20 minutes," Lahouti maintained, adding that "If it was not for approval from the higher up, the Guardian Council would have stopped the ratification."

Lahouti's remarks appear even more optimistic than they look, as some hardliners are adamant to make sure that there will be no agreement. Hossein Shariatmadari, the editor of hardline daily Kayhan, which is linked to Khamenei’s office, told Didban Iran website that Iran should ban the IAEA inspectors' visit to its nuclear sites.

He added that "If Iran wanted it could have made nuclear weapons and the IAEA, the United States and Europe would have not been able to do a damn thing." He said: "We expect Iranian officials to ban IAEA inspectors visit to our sensitive nuclear and security sites in order to blind the eyes of the CIA and Mossad."

Shariatmadari claimed that "UNSC resolutions against Iran will have no value and this is something the United States and the three European states that have suggested to refer Iran's case to the Security Council know very well."

UANI said in a statement Friday it had contacted the banks “to inquire about the nature of their relationship with the Iranian regime and call upon each to cut ties with Tehran.” The group said each bank had dollar accounts “ultimately controlled by Iranian firms and banking institutions sanctioned by the United States.”

As part of ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions introduced in 2018 on leaving the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, US President Donald Trump signed an executive order threatening punitive US action against any third party dealing with Iran’s financial sector.

China, other world powers, and rights groups all condemned the move, and while Beijing’s bilateral trade fell 34 percent to $23 billion in 2019, China still bought Iranian oil, thwarting Trump’s stated aim of ending Iran’s crude exports.

UANI approached the Zhejiang Mintai Commercial Bank, ICBC, China Guangfa Bank, Shanghai Pudong Development Bank, Zhejiang Tailong Commercial Bank, and Zhejiang Chouzhou Commercial Bank.

UANI’s Chief Executive Officer Mark Wallace, said a lack of firm US action alongside “warm and abiding ties between Tehran and the Chinese Communist Party has given Chinese financial institutions confidence that there is no consequence for aiding the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism.” Earlier in June, UANI claimed Chinese petrochemical refiners, or "teapots," had bought $22 billion of Iranian crude since President Joe Biden took office.

Hossein Shariatmadari said in an interview with Fars news, affiliated with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, that several sabotage operations against Iran's nuclear facilities and assassinations of the country's nuclear scientists have been carried out using information gathered by Mossad and CIA spies under the cover of IAEA inspectors.

He referred to a 2015 article by Joshua Rovner from the Brookings institute that had said, “Not only will intelligence agencies benefit from inspection reports dealing with Iran’s nuclear program, but they will be free to explore other areas of Iran’s scientific and associated industrial infrastructure.”

Criticizing the recent visit by the International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi to Israel ahead of the IAEA Board of Governors’ meeting, Shariatmadari said the UN watchdog must explain whether Iran is dealing with the agency or Israel in the nuclear issue. 

Grossi was in Israel in advance of a meeting of the IAEA board scheduled for June 6-10, set to discuss Grossi's report saying that Tehran has failed to give satisfactory responses to agency queries over its nuclear work before 2003. On Friday, Iran described the visit as one of the "Zionist" plans against the revival of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

The Israeli premier last week issued documents from 2004-05 purporting to show that Iran used confidential IAEA files to mislead agency inspectors. This fueled reports that the United States or European states might move a resolution critical of Iran at next week’s meeting.