Skip to main content

Let’s hear a cheer for the IAEA!

The IAEA has ‘recognized the current circumstances’ and found a way to proceed with Iran under its NPT safeguards agreement, signing a ‘framework agreement’ today in Cairo. IAEA DG Grossi said the following in his opening statement for the IAEA Board of Governors on Monday, September 8. 
        The Agency’s safeguards measures continue to apply in Iran as in every other country with a comprehensive safeguards agreement (CSA)..I recognise the current circumstances and have expressed the Agency’s readiness to consider Iran’s concerns and suggestions insofar as these would be compatible with the CSA. 
        We have [held] technical discussions in Tehran and in Vienna aimed at reaching agreement on the practical steps that will be applied to conduct verification activities in Iran pursuant to the CSA…It is my sincere hope that within the next few days it will be possible to come to a successful conclusion of these discussions. 

        The next day, today, September 9, in Cairo, IAEA DG Rafael Grossi… met with Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi [with mediation] by Egyptian Foreign Minister Badr Abdel-Atti. Grossi posted on X that a framework agreement had been reached "on practical modalities to resume inspection activities in Iran." 
        [Araghchi] demanded "impartiality, independence and professionalism" from the IAEA. He emphasized that in the event of "hostile actions against Iran" — including the reimposition of sanctions — Iran would consider the agreement terminated. Germany, France and Britain have been threatening to reimpose UN sanctions unless Iran committed to serious negotiations on its nuclear programme. [Reuters] 

        This marks a significant step in the right direction. It is to be applauded. Hopefully it will be followed up by the E3 and the U.S.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary.  Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’  Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’.   Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.
Post a Comment
Read more

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.?                 To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension.                 For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...
Post a Comment
Read more

‘Making nuclear fuel’ under the NPT

It is with some hesitation that I take issue with the latest publication of the renowned Henry Sokolski and Sharon Squassoni on August 15 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, titled: “ Actually, the NPT doesn’t guarantee a right to make nuclear fuel .”  But someone should defend the IAEA and international safeguards! Here are points in question.            ‘ The [NPT] treaty was designed to prevent dangerous bombmaking activitie s.’  NPT is far more complex than that. It is common to state the three pillars of NPT: nuclear disarmament; nuclear nonproliferation; and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Nonproliferation involves the commitment of non-nuclear states not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept IAEA inspection to confirm that commitment is being followed. Perhaps Sokolsky intends to refer to INFCIRC/153, which lays out how IAEA and the state cooperate to carry out that confirmation. If so, INFCIRC/153 is not designed to ‘prevent’...
Post a Comment
Read more