Iran forges ahead on nukes

"They have not done a whole lot. It was a calculated move to say to the Americans: 'If you keep pressing us, we can go all the way,' " says Hadi Semati, a Tehran University political scientist currently at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington. "It was a signal: 'Don't push us into that corner.' "

Two years of talks with the EU, during which Iran suspended all nuclear activities, failed last August. Until the Feb. 4 decision by the IAEA, Iran had also adhered voluntarily to provisions of the Additional Protocol of the NPT, which permits snap inspections.

But after the IAEA decision, Iran gave notice that it would only continue with its minimal obligations under the NPT. At Tehran's request, IAEA seals were removed from centrifuge equipment, and video surveillance cameras taken down.

"Iran is taking a pretty deliberate position not to cooperate with the IAEA," says David Albright, a former IAEA weapons inspector and head of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) in Washington. "It's not a surprise, but it's sad, because it seems it will inevitably lead to a confrontation."

"They are beginning to think strategically," he says, such that UN weapons inspectors could pass information to the US military that "could help if there is an attack."

Though Ali Larijani, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, visited Moscow for further negotiations Wednesday, few analysts expect a deal.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday sounded optimistic: "We think we can come to an agreement that a joint venture on the soil of the Russian Federation will be able to meet Iran's needs fully."

Gregory Schulte, the US representative to the IAEA, noted in a statement that Iran had already stockpiled 85 metric tons of converted uranium gas, that feeds centrifuges. "This is not a peaceful program," the statement read. "This is not innocent 'research and development.' "

A separate compromise has also been floated during the past year, in which Iran would maintain a token enrichment capability. That concept was taken a step further in a report published last week by the Brussels-based International Crisis Group.

Noting that zero enrichment in Iran is likely "unachievable," in Iran's political climate, it lays down a "delayed limited enrichment" plan that would recognize Iran's "right" to enrich uranium at home, but delay the program by up to seven years.

"Both sides inevitably will protest that this plan goes too far," reads the ICG report. "[T]he West because it permits Tehran to eventually achieve full nuclear fuel cycle capability ... and Iran because it significantly delays and limits the development of that fuel cycle capability."

Such a compromise, the report suggests, would be cemented by intrusive IAEA safeguards, limited levels and types of enrichment, a US security guarantee not to use force against Iran, and the threat of UN sanctions.

Such a deal would be a "very bad compromise," says Albright of ISIS. "If you allow 500 [centrifuges], and they master that, they will want 5,000. You have to have the confrontation now, and see what happens. Not a year from now."

The likely shape of that confrontation remains unclear. Action by the Security Council is uncertain, though if it leads to sanctions they would most likely be applied gradually.

Iran has been working to avoid Security Council sanctions, but may also be figuring that it can withstand any step. "They believe they can stand up to the pressure," says Semati, at the Woodrow Wilson Center. "Whether that is reality of not, that is the perception. They want to change the framework of negotiations."

Page: 1 | 2