The EU is pressing forward, for the first time in around 18 months, with efforts to condemn Iran regarding its nuclear violations as part of this week’s IAEA Board of Governors meeting, and despite US opposition.
Reports started to surface of the EU’s intentions last week and again overnight between Monday and Tuesday with leaks of its proposed condemnation text.
The Islamic Republic for its part has promised to retaliate should the IAEA issue such a condemnation.
After past condemnations or new sanctions from the US, the West, or the IAEA, Tehran has often reduced its cooperation with the UN’s nuclear inspectors by shutting off surveillance cameras, restricting visits to certain nuclear facilities, or expelling certain inspectors.
However, neither the EU-IAEA’s moves nor Iran’s are clear at the moment.
While creating some additional pressure and embarrassing diplomatically, a third IAEA condemnation in four years, without any concrete threat, such as a referral to the UN Security Council for a potential snapback of global sanctions, may have minimal impact.
2015 Iran deal due to expire in October 2025
As things stand, the 2015 nuclear deal snapback itself as a “stick” to use against Iran is due to expire around January 2026, and certain restrictions on how many centrifuges Tehran can run is due to expire in October 2025.
Likewise, if Iran only reduces some of the IAEA’s inspections or surveillance, but keeps some crucial ones in place, and does not leave the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), it is unlikely that there would be any impending crisis with the West.
Currently, Iran’s nuclear violations before the IAEA are its reduction of cooperation with inspections and surveillance, as well as its failure to give coherent and credible answers to questions about illicit nuclear materials found in two nuclear locations: Varamin and Turquzabad.
In a report last week, Institute for Science and International Security President David Albright wrote, “If the board fails to act, the best-case scenario is that Iran will succeed in maintaining secrecy over past and potentially ongoing nuclear weapons activities indefinitely, weakening the IAEA in the process. At worst, it will succeed in steadily augmenting its nuclear program penalty-free, enabling it to build a nuclear weapon more quickly than Western powers could detect and stop. This would cause regional nuclear proliferation and irreparable damage to the IAEA and the NPT.”
Separately, the Islamic Republic is also in violation of the 2015 nuclear deal, having enriched large quantities of uranium up to both the 20% and 60% levels, far above the permitted 3.67% level, and dangerously close to the 90% weaponized level.
In contrast to Albright’s position, the US government is reportedly opposed to confronting Iran at this stage because of a mix of concern that Tehran might escalate the situation into a crisis right as the US presidential election season comes to its most crucial point as well as concerns that Iran could choose to aggravate the ongoing Israel-Hamas-Hezbollah-Yemen war.
There is also a debate between the EU and the US about whether any new pressure will make any difference after Iran president Ebrahim Raisi died in a helicopter crash and elections for his replacement are not set to take place until June 28.
