Global Security Newswire

The International Atomic Energy Agency yesterday said Iran was interfering in a probe of its nuclear activities by blocking the appointment of specific investigators, Agence France-Presse reported (see GSN, Aug. 26).

The "repeated objection by Iran to the designation of inspectors with experience in Iran's nuclear fuel cycle and facilities hampers the inspection process," IAEA chief Yukiya Amano said in a report made public by the Institute for Science and International Security.

Tehran recently said it would not allow two veteran inspectors to watch over the nation's nuclear operations. The officials had identified unreported atomic work in the nation, but Iran said the two were banned because their findings were incorrect.

Prohibitions on select IAEA inspectors "makes our work more difficult" as their replacements do not have the necessary experience and background on Iranian nuclear operations, one diplomat said. "It also adds to pressure on the inspectors. Some may feel unsure, they may fear being kicked out of the country," the source said.

In addition, the agency pressed Tehran to justify "a number of incidents involving the breaking of seals by the operator of the" Natanz uranium enrichment facility, says the document, an quarterly update for the U.N. nuclear watchdog's 35-nation governing board on Iran's compliance with nuclear monitoring procedures.

Tehran indicated the ruptures were "accidental." Such seals can break during the transfer of equipment, and and the causes behind two of the four breakages have already been described and confirmed, said the high-level diplomat with knowledge of the agency's Iran probe.

Still, Iran has yet to give reasons for the other two ruptures, the official said, adding there are "many, many seals in that facility. Iran cannot move anything without us knowing."

Inspectors planned next month to conduct a physical audit aimed at determining whether Iran has diverted any of its atomic fuel or technology, the report states.

Iran has amassed 2,803 kilograms of low-enriched uranium and 22 kilograms, roughly 49 pounds, of material enriched to 20 percent, the document estimates. The Persian Gulf nation in February began further refining low-enriched uranium from its stockpile, ostensibly for producing medical isotopes at an existing research reactor in Tehran. The United States and other Western powers, though, have feared the process could help Iran produce nuclear-weapon material, which has an enrichment level around 90 percent. Tehran has insisted its nuclear ambitions are strictly peaceful.

Iran had installed 8,856 uranium enrichment centrifuges at its Natanz complex as of the end of last month, an increase of 328 machines since May, the report estimates. The number of centrifuges at the site refining uranium hexafluoride, though, has fallen by 164 machines, to 3,772 (Simon Morgan, Agence France-Presse I/Google News, Aug. 6).

Tehran has continued stonewalling an investigation of "the possible existence in Iran of past or current undisclosed nuclear-related activities involving military-related organizations, including activities related to the development of a nuclear payload for a missile," the document says. It is “essential that Iran engage with the agency on these issues” because information could be lost with “the passage of time,” the New York Times quoted the assessment as saying (Sanger/Broad, New York Times, Sept. 7).

"The report reaffirms the concerns we've had about enrichment all along and again shows that Iran continues to not cooperate with the IAEA," U.S. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said. "This justifies why we continue to put pressure on Iran through mounting economic sanctions -- a strategy we believe is working" (Crawford/Solomon, Wall Street Journal I, Sept. 7).

Iran, though, suggested the document should free it of suspicion, AFP reported.

"After seven years of continuous inspections, this report stresses that Iran is not diverting nuclear material toward military and prohibited objectives,” state media quoted Iranian Ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency Ali Asghar Soltanieh as saying.

“Although this report has tarnished the agency’s technical reputation ... it is clearly evident that all Iran’s nuclear activities, particularly (uranium) enrichment is under the supervision of the agency,” Soltanieh said.

The IAEA document displays "Iran’s commitment to the regulations of the agency’s statutes and safeguards," he said, adding that U.N. Security Council calls for Iran to halt uranium enrichment were "impractical and "beyond" the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (Agence France-Presse II/Khaleej Times, Sept. 6).

Tehran was entitled to block the nomination of specific U.N. inspectors, Iranian Atomic Energy Organization head Ali Akbar Salehi added, according to the Associated Press. Iran revoked the right of the two IAEA officials to visit its nuclear facilities after the inspectors alleged earlier this year that a Tehran laboratory had housed sensitive equipment that could aid in separating weapon-usable nuclear material (see
nw_20100604_6379" target="blank">GSN, June 4).

"This is our right as well as the right of other members of the agency to choose the inspectors," state media quoted Salehi as saying. "Basically, all member nations select from a list provided by the agency" (Nasser Karimi, Associated Press I/Yahoo!News, Sept. 7).

Meanwhile, European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton last week said she urged China to enforce Security Council penalties against Iran, Reuters reported.

Ashton recalled telling Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi that Beijing must do its part to implement the sanctions.

"We expected that we would all work together in a way that would be effective but that we would stand together," Ashton said. "My message was meant to be very clear -- that we would expect that we wouldn't see 'backfill,'" she said, referring to the potential for Chinese companies to do business with Iranian markets vacated by other countries.

It was still "too early to tell" whether China was "backfilling," she said (Reuters, Sept. 2).

Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen on Saturday highlighted the importance of Turkey aiding in the sanctions effort, but he said he would not "question or rebut" Ankara's opposition to the latest measures in June, AP reported (Suzan Fraser, Associated Press II/Yahoo!News, Sept. 4).

Elsewhere, Japan's governing Cabinet on Friday endorsed various asset freezes and other unilateral measures against Iran, AFP reported (Agence France-Presse III/Khaleej Times, Sept. 3).

The United Arab Emirates' central bank has called on lending entities to declare funds sent to Iran each month, the Journal reported. The declarations would inform a assessment of the impact of punitive measures against Tehran.

The bank indicated it planned "to run this exercise for just a few months," after August. The study would "contribute to studies being conducted to better understand the economic impact of the U.N. Security Council sanctions against Iran," it said (Nour Malas, Wall Street Journal II, Sept. 6).

The majority of UAE banks have cut off transfers of funds to Iran, insiders told AFP (Acil Tabbara, Agence France-Presse IV/Google News, Sept. 5).

Governments should be ready to pursue further punitive measures and even military strikes against Iran to curb the nation's atomic efforts, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair told ABC News on Sunday.

"I had someone say to me ... 'Come on, look, supposing Iran gets the nuclear weapon, it's not the end of the world. I mean, why should they want to use it? Why would they want to cause all that destruction?'", the Journal quoted Blair as saying. "It's a perfectly sensible argument you hear. And who knows, they may be right. All I know is, if I was a decision maker, I wouldn't take the risk."

"I would tell them they can't have [a nuclear bomb], and if necessary, they will be confronted with stronger sanctions and diplomacy," he said.

"I don't want to see [military action], but I'm saying I think you cannot exclude it because the primary -- the primary objective -- has got to be to prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon," Blair said (Adam Entous, Wall Street Journal III, Sept. 6).