In October 2003, Iran concluded a voluntary agreement with France, Germany, and the United Kingdom collectively known as the “E3,” to suspend its enrichment activities, sign and implement an Additional Protocol to its International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)  safeguards agreement, and comply fully with the IAEA’s investigation. As a result, the agency’s board decided to refrain from referring the matter to the U.N. Security Council.

On 18th December 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocols to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The understanding is the IAEA would therefore be able to carry out “anywhere anytime” inspections in Iran. Tehran signed this Additional Protocol in December 2003, but has never ratified it.

UN Security Council adopted six resolutions under Chapter VII of the UN Charter that called on Iran to suspend all uranium enrichment and its activities for the eventual production of plutonium. Chapter VII resolutions are binding international law. But what if the West now says that the suspension is no longer necessary? What does that mean for the binding nature of Chapter VII resolutions? NOTHING …

Tehran is previously in breach of a number of Security Council resolutions requiring it cease all uranium enrichment and heavy water activity a process used to create weapons-grade plutonium. Furthermore, none of this activity is even remotely necessary if Iran, as it claims, only wants a peaceful nuclear program.

So why is Iran conducting Nuclear Enrichment?  Time and time again we hear the Islamic Republic needs to be given a grand bargain to bring it to the nuclear table. In fact there was a grand bargain given, “uranium enrichment”.  

While running for president, Barack Obama promised to meet the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran “without preconditions.” In order to jump-start diplomacy upon taking office, Obama recognized the country’s right to enrich uranium. Rather than enable diplomacy, this concession poisoned it. With a single statement, Obama unilaterally stripped of authority three hard-fought Security Council Resolutions forbidding enrichment. Iranian authorities responded by ramping up enrichment and flatly rejecting to negotiate suspension.

There are over thirty countries around the world that have nuclear power programs but according to the World Nuclear Association, only eleven have the capacity to enrich their own fuel.

For several decades the Islamic Republic has been a leading sponsor of International terrorism, to wit the leading nuclear security agreement should mandate the Islamic Republic to purchase nuclear fuel from aboard.   Considering Argentina, Armenia, Sweden and Spain can buy nuclear fuel from abroad, why can’t Iran? Canada and Mexico can pursue this policy, why can’t Iran? Moreover, since numerous countries have nuclear energy without any enrichment capabilities, why is this not part of nuclear negotiations, where are the nuclear experts on this matter?  Does Media include this in their reporting, where is the coverage, where’s the context?

 The reality is that, of countries that have enrichment capabilities, the preponderance majority  also possess nuclear weapons. A county that could enrich uranium to about 3.5 percent will also have the ability to enrich it to about 90 percent. Having fuel cycle capability virtually determines that a country that possesses this capability can produce nuclear weapons.

President Rouhani: "So in the context of nuclear technology, particularly of research and development and peaceful nuclear technology, we will not accept any limitations. And in accordance with the parliament law, in the future, we're going to need 20,000 megawatts of nuclear produced electricity and we're determined to obtain the nuclear fuel for the nuclear installation at the hands of our Iranian scientists. And we are going to follow on this pat , “Not under any circumstances" will we destroy any centrifuges,”.

The Islamic Republic is expected to maintain operation of 6,500-plus centrifuges under a final agreement about two-thirds of the 10,000 centrifuges Iran currently operates. This compares to the White House initial position that Iran should only be allowed to operate a few hundred centrifuges. Furthermore, it no longer appears Iran will be required to dismantle any of the total 20,000 IR-1 centrifuges or 1,000 advanced centrifuges it possesses.

Tehran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Araghchi: “All research into a new generation of centrifuges will continue.”

In 2014 Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei outlined 11 red lines on nuclear talks in an address to the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran. The website NuclearEnergy.ir pulled out his 11 points and distributed the graphic below. 


Deputy Foreign Minister Araghchi: “We will in no way, never, dismantle our [nuclear] centrifuges.”

Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei: “On the issue of enrichment, their [the P5+1] goal is to make the Islamic Republic satisfied with 10,000 SWUs [separative work units, the measurement used in enrichment]. But they have begun from 500, 1000. Approximately, 10,000 SWUs are the product of 10,000 centrifuges the ones that we already have. This is their goal. Officials tell us that we need about 190,000 SWUs [equal to approximately 190,000 centrifuges].”

So what do we do?

It is time to cease dancing to the tune of the Islamic Republic of Iran, stop ignoring and mutilating pass agreements that only serves to Iran. Nuclear talks appeasements are only placing the Islamic Republic on the path to becoming a nuclear-armed state and that eventually causes a military crisis NOT prevent one.

1). Any decision taken in to allow Iran to continue to enrich uranium to any level stands in contradiction to UN Security Council Resolution 1696 as well as five other resolutions that followed which prohibited Iran from enriching uranium. Resolution 1696, which was adopted on July 31, 2006, stated that the Security Council: "Demands, in this context, that Iran shall suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, including research and development, to be verified by the IAEA.

2). Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT or NNPT) the Islamic Republic of Iran is a party to and has concluded comprehensive safeguards agreements. Non-nuclear-weapon States (NNWS) parties to the NPT have the right to use nuclear energy or peaceful purposes if they comply with the other articles of the NPT, in particular articles II and III. Article II stipulates inter alia that a NNWS "undertakes not to manufacture and not to seek or receive any assistance in the manufacture of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" and Article III provides that IAEA safeguards shall be applied on all source or special fissionable material in all peaceful nuclear activities.

2003 The Nuclear Accords Tehran Signed, then simply recanted. These Nuclear Accords are simply the ones which Iran should be required to adhere to …  

Tehran’s Safeguards Agreement. Article 48 of that agreement states that the IAEA “may send inspectors to facilities to verify the design information provided to the IAEA Agency “.

On 26th February 2003, Iran accepted changes to the Subsidiary Arrangement. Before then, Iran had to inform the IAEA of the existence and features of a facility only 180 days before the planned arrival of nuclear material to that facility. Now, Iran must inform the IAEA as soon as it decides to build a nuclear plant and keep the agency regularly updated. On 18th December 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocols to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The understanding is the IAEA would therefore be able to carry out “anywhere –anytime” inspections in the Islamic Republic.

In October 2003, Iran concluded a voluntary agreement with France, Germany, and the United Kingdom collectively known as the “E3,” to suspend its enrichment activities, sign and implement an Additional Protocol to its IAEA safeguards agreement, and comply fully with the IAEA’s investigation. As a result, the agency’s board decided to refrain from referring the matter to the U.N. Security Council.

On 18th December 2003 Iran signed the Additional Protocols to the Non-Proliferation Treaty. The understanding is the IAEA would therefore be able to carry out “anywhere anytime” inspections in Iran. Tehran signed this Additional Protocol in December 2003, but has never ratified it.

In reality there is one person in control of Iran’s nuclear negations, and agreements the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, he has the final; say on all matters period.  For some strange reason President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry are totally oblivious to this critical factor. The Islamic Republic of Iran Is an Islamic autocracy is a system of government in which a supreme political power is concentrated in the hands of one person. His decisions are neither subject to external legal restraints nor regularized mechanisms of popular control.

The Supreme Leader almost never uses his statutory powers to impose policies or decisions upon the system, relying instead on more discrete statements and actions to guide the decision-making process to the desired end state. The system is designed to give the Supreme Leader a sort of plausible deniability with regard to any particular policy and its outcome, shielding him and his position from the repercussions of policy failures. Both Khomeini and Khamenei have shown a great degree of willingness to accept the loss of arbitrary power and control required by such a system in return for the protection it has afforded them.

The question no one asks, why at the fraction of the cost of nuclear facilities Iran could invest in its vast untapped oil & gas reserves. Why is Tehran wasting billions of dollars, why would it build nuclear power plants in one of the most dangerous quake zone in the world? In addition for the past decade, Iran has had a water crisis.  Moreover, does not have the thousands of tons of water required to cool a nuclear reactor, that is why it is building them along its coastline in the Persia Gulf. Plus Iran has no plans for long-term storage of nuclear waste, also an additional coast.

However Tehran does not need nuclear power plants domestic needs, Iran is one of the most hydrocarbon-rich areas in the world. Iran has the world’s second-largest deposit of proven gas reserves and is among the top four in proven oil reserves, translating to massive potential for oil wealth. According to the Iran Petroleum Ministry, the proved natural gas reserves of Iran are about 1,046 trillion cubic feet (29.6 trillion cubic meters) or about 15.8% of world's total reserves, of which 33% are as associated gas and 67% is in non-associated gas fields. It has the world's second largest reserves after Russia.

President Obama’s Iranian nuclear appeasement accords do not address the most deadly and pressing issues of the State Sponsor of International terrorism, the nuclear military dimensions.  

The IAEA 2011 report summary noted that, “The Agency has serious concerns regarding possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program. After assessing carefully and critically the extensive information available to it, the Agency finds the information to be, overall, credible. The information indicates that Iran has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device. 

IAEA 2011 Iran Safeguards Report: Iran’s Work and Foreign Assistance on a Multipoint Initiation System for a Nuclear Weapon.   

The military annexes to the November 2011 IAEA report indicated that,

 “ Iran has made major progress in assembling all the technology and developing the manufacturing skills and equipment necessary to design a fission warhead. The annexes indicated that Iran is closer to building a warhead small enough to mount on a missile and test it through simulated explosive testing than has previously been publically reported. IAEA reporting since that time has provided more indicators that Iran is close to being able to test a Uranium fission device once it obtains weapons grade Uranium, and key US experts indicate that Iran may have acquired more weapons design and passive test data than the IAEA has yet announced.”

 The Gulf Military Balance Volume II: The Missile and Nuclear Dimensions and Options for Deterrence, Defense, Containment, and Preventive Strikes By Anthony H. Cordesman and Bryan Gold July 18, 2013 page 77,csis.org/files/publication/120222_Iran_Gulf_Mil_Bal_II_WMD.pdf

More than 20 years after Congress passed its first nuclear-related sanctions, Iran continues to defy the international community. It has refused to accept any limits on its centrifuge production. It has refused to explain the possible military dimensions of its program. Moreover, it has refused to make a meaningful offer during negotiations that would end its pursuit of nuclear weapons. However the paradox is why President Obama has allowed this, he is the sole architecture of what will become one of the most International devastating nuclear negations in history.  What is even more troubling he is keeping his current Iranian appeasements & concessions hidden within secret talks. Obama has also indicated he may entirely bypass US Congressional Constitutional mandated rafting vote. Moreover, he would go directly to the United Nations to ratify his Iranian nuclear treaty.

The answer is simple, the 2003  Nuclear Accords Tehran Signed, then simply recanted. These Nuclear Accords are in reality the ones which Iran should be required to adhere to …  these accords addressees all critical issues.

  

Understand the Threat of a Nuclear Armed Iran … The last Word

  Hate Indoctrination Is A Professed Goal Of Iranian Textbooks." The Iranian education system is preparing its students for a global war against the West, in the name of Islam, Describing Iran's school system as a "Global War Curriculum," Catalogs how pupils as young as nine are conditioned to take part in a global jihad against such "infidel oppressors" as Israel and the United States.

Hate Indoctrination Is A Professed Goal Of Iranian Textbooks." The Iranian education system is preparing its students for a global war against the West, in the name of Islam,

A Study of 115 Iranian school textbooks concludes and substantiates that Tehran is preparing its children for war, and is willing to risk massive casualties for the opportunity to defeat America in a world-wide cataclysmic confrontation.

 Iran's school system is a "Global War Curriculum," Pupils as young as nine are conditioned to take part in a global jihad against such "infidel oppressors" as Israel and the United States.

 

Discrimination and Intolerance in Iran’s Textbooks Saeed Paivandi a Freedom House Publication 2008http://www.freedomhouse.org/report/discrimination-and-intolerance-irans-textbooks/methodology




Be the first to know - Join our Facebook page.




Relevant to your professional network? Please share on Linkedin
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this blog article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the official position or viewpoint of The Jerusalem Post. Blog authors are NOT employees, freelance or salaried, of The Jerusalem Post.

Think others should know about this? Please share