Skip to main content

You do want Iran to remain in NPT, don’t you?

    Shortly after the 2026 NPT Review Conference started on April 27, Christopher Yeaw, Assistant Secretary for the U.S. Bureau of Arms Control and Nonproliferation, picked a fight with Iran. My guess is that he chose to do that on his own, without senior level authorization. His intervention prompts me to say to him and the Trump administration, you do want Iran to remain in NPT, don’t you? 

    The President of the Conference had been chosen in advance to be Ambassador Do Hung Viet of Viet Nam. Thirty-four Vice Presidents were proposed by the Eastern European Group, Western Group and Non-Aligned Group. The Non-Aligned Group selected Algeria and others including Iran. 

    Yeaw, in a ‘right to reply’, told the conference that it was "indisputable that Iran ‌has long demonstrated its contempt for the ⁠non-proliferation commitments of the NPT," and had refused to cooperate with the U.N. nuclear watchdog to resolve questions about its program. He called Iran's selection "beyond shameful and an ⁠embarrassment to the credibility of this conference." WOW! 

    Reza Najafi, Iranian ambassador to IAEA, rejected the U.S. statement as "baseless and politically motivated." "It is indefensible that United States, as the only state ever to have used nuclear weapons, and the one that continues to expand and modernize its nuclear arsenal... seeks to position itself ‌as an arbitrator of the compliance." 

    Yeaw’s background is military. Yeaw has had an extensive career in nuclear weaponry and nuclear nonproliferation. He had a leading role in the dismantlement of Libya’s embryonic centrifuge program. Probably he wants to see Iran stripped of all its nuclear accomplishments. 

    First, his statement that it is “indisputable that Iran ‌has long demonstrated its contempt for the ⁠non-proliferation commitments of the NPT” is FAKE NEWS, to use his administration’s choice of words. And making that statement at the NPT Review Conference was “beyond shameful and an ⁠embarrassment to the credibility of" the current U.S. administration. 

    Does he understand that interventions like his encourage Iran to decide “enough is enough” from the U.S. and announce it is withdrawing from NPT because of the continuing existential threat from the U.S., evidenced by U.S. military attacks in June 2025 and in 2026 while Iran considered that it was engaged in good faith negotiations? 

    Would that Yeaw really, deeply, understood that it is exactly through the NPT process that Iran has commited not to pursue nuclear weapons and accepts verification that it is meeting its commitments through IAEA safeguards. Yes, Iran has not cooperated fully with IAEA to resolve questions about its program. The IAEA through its Safeguards Department, Director General and Board of Governors is following the designated process for follow up - within the NPT regime. That is what the U.S. government should support and emphasize, not outbursts like Yeaw's that Iran can rebuff as politically motivated.

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

U.S. Sanctions, Middle East views

Trump’s special envoy Witkoff has hit the capitals again; in Tel Aviv Netanyahu probably told him to tell Trump that he will take over all of Gaza; in Moscow Putin probably told him to tell Trump that Ukraine will be destroyed and forget the sanctions. Witkoff didn’t get to number 3 on his list, Iran. But Trump played another ‘ getting to a deal ’ with Iran card, adding sanctions he can later get credit for removing. And the Middle East commentators are worriedly reacting to the Iran situation. Here are some highlights.  From Newsweek:       The U.S. announced on July 30 the largest Iran-related sanctions since 2018 , targeting entities and vessels linked to the country's petroleum sector: 20 oil firms, 5 vessel management companies, 1 wholesaler, and over 115 individuals in 17 countries and regions, including the U.K., Italy, Switzerland, India, the UAE and Hong Kong.       U.S. State Department spokesperson Tammy Bruce said: "Today's Depar...
Post a Comment
Read more