1200 KG OF HOPE

The developments unfolding around Iran's nuclear programme keep "gratifying" the world media with new turns, intrigues and conjectures. Attempts to resolve this complex international problem are viewed through the prism of various geopolitical aspects. But almost all analyses boil down to the fact that peaceful and diplomatic efforts around Iran's nuclear programme are now entering a new crucial phase.  

Temporary solution

As Iranian Foreign Minister Manuchehr Mottaki said on 26 October, Tehran is prepared to "share" some of its uranium reserves for further additional enrichment abroad. At the same time, Mottaki said, "there are two options on the table" - either to send low enriched uranium to third countries or to buy nuclear fuel… As this story went to print, Tehran had not yet made the final decision.

As for the agreement, it envisages that around 75 per cent of low enriched Iranian uranium (1200 kg) will be sent first to IAEA facilities, enriched in Russia (to a level of 19.75 per cent) and then sent to France, which has the so-called fuel assembly technology (which can be used exclusively for peaceful ends). As a result, Iran will receive as much fuel as is required for a nuclear reactor, but not enough for a nuclear bomb.

Iran will need to further enrich the uranium to ensure the operation of its low-capacity "light water" scientific reactor producing isotopes for medical needs (diagnostics and treatment). It is said that Iran currently has to spend around $1 million a year importing isotopes. Meanwhile, it is worth noting that Iran received the reactor in question from America during the Shah's rule as part of the "Atoms for peace" programme. Experts believe that it is this same reactor that kick-started Iran's notorious nuclear programme… The USA, Russia and France have supported the plan, which is expected to ease international tension over Iran's nuclear agenda and allow additional time for further diplomatic moves. Some analysts believe that the agreement will help slow down Tehran's proposed development of a nuclear bomb by about a year.  

First talk about this document emerged after the early October meeting between representatives from Iran and six negotiators (five permanent members of the UN SC plus Germany) in Geneva. To follow up on the Geneva agreements, 19 October saw the start of talks in Vienna, during which Iran agreed to consider a draft version of the agreement. At the same time, it is said that secret talks on a deal with Iran involving the IAEA, USA, Russia and France have been under way for quite some time. 

The general director of the agency, Muhammad Al-Baradei, has expressed hope that if all interested parties reach agreement, the package will be approved by the IAEA at its next board meeting, due on 26-27 November.

Another apparent concession on the part of Iran is that it has provided IAEA inspectors access to its subterranean uranium enrichment enterprise near Qom. Earlier Tehran had told the West that the Qom facility would be commissioned within six months and would produce the low enriched uranium required for the construction of a nuclear power plant. Iran had planned to assemble 3,000 centrifuges to produce radioactive raw materials for the plant. After their visit inspectors will submit a special report to the UN and IAEA administration. Meanwhile, the question is whether this should be viewed as a panacea for the crisis surrounding Iran's nuclear agenda. First, it is worth indicating that the talks are about three quarters of Iran's registered nuclear fuel reserves. According to The New York Times, if uranium is sent in small batches, Iran will almost immediately replenish its reserves. 

In any case, this is only a temporary solution. It is said that Tehran has the capacity to enrich uranium at, for example, a pretty large enrichment plant in Natanza which, according to different estimates, operates 8,000 centrifuges. Besides, as mentioned above, Iran is also considering buying high enriched uranium from other countries …

Many Iranian politicians insist that the country has the right to enrich uranium because it is pursuing purely peaceful ends. Several public figures, including Parliament Speaker Ali Larijani, have condemned the Vienna settlement plan. However, the real level of division in the Iranian administration is not known. 

Divide?

Things were made worse by developments on 18 October, when an act of terror rocked the town of Sarbaz in the Sistan-Belujistan province, giving rise to a multitude of questions and guesses. As a result of the explosion, triggered by a suicide bomber, more than 40 people were killed, including six high-ranking commanders of the Islamic Revolution Protection Corps. The terrorist act occurred during a meeting of Corps representatives with leaders of Shiite and Sunni tribes in the province.

Responsibility for the explosion was assumed by the Sunni extremist group Jundalla, which says that its key mission is to protect Sunnis in Shiite Iran. The Sistan-Belujistan province, located on the border with Pakistan, is populated predominantly by Sunnis, some of whom are opposed to Iran's Shiite administration. The Corps command arrived in the region to meet elders of these tribes.

Tehran stated that the raid originated on Pakistani territory and demanded that the Jundalla leader, Abdulla Malek Riggi, and his accomplices be handed over to Iran. Otherwise, the authorities threatened to use "any options to counter terrorists". It was reported on 22 October that Islamabad had handed over 18 Jundalla extremists to Tehran, including the brother of Abdulla Riggi, who had himself gone into hiding in Afghanistan. 

At the same time, Iran, via the words of Ali Larijani, also accused the USA and Britain of complicity in the act of terror. He said these countries "are providing every assistance" to clandestine anti-government groups in areas bordering on Pakistan. Larijani also added that the act of sabotage in Sarbaz had "burned the bridges" US President Barack Obama was planning to build with Tehran. It is also notable that shortly before the act of terror in Sarbaz, some media circulated reports of the death or incapacity of the country's supreme leader - Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. In response his press service published, albeit with a slight delay, a photograph disproving rumours of a deterioration in his condition or even death. Iran's supreme leader subsequently stated that he was opposed to direct talks with the USA. According to the deputy speaker of the Iranian parliament, Mohammad Reza Bahonar, the Supreme National Security Council and the supreme leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran believe that Tehran's foreign policy "is based on the absence of talks with the United States" and "for this reason Iran will not maintain direct contact with Washington". 

There is further evidence of the divide in the Iranian administration. Against the backdrop of reports about the talks between six countries and Iran, Israeli media threw up a sensational report (although early details of meetings leaked to the Australian newspaper The Age) that the political and arms director of the Israeli commission on nuclear energy, Meyrav Zafari-Odiz and Iran's representative to the IAEA, Ali Ashgar Soltani, had met repeatedly in Cairo on 29-30 October. This first dialogue between Iranian and Israeli officials since 1979 took place on the sidelines of a forum organized by the international commission on nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament, which was also joined by representatives of the League of Arab Nations, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, Morocco, the UAE and Saudi Arabia, as well as observers from the EU and USA. At the same time, the Israeli and Iranian representatives did not even shake hands in public. 

Observers say that the meeting was prompted by the general atmosphere which has now been established and US President Barack Obama's readiness for talks with "arch foes" and representatives of the "axis of evil". The dialogue, if it can be described as such, yielded no fruit. In fact, eyewitnesses say it was conducted in an atmosphere of mistrust and mutual reproach. However, it is clear that what matters most at this stage is not the content of the talks but the fact that they were held. It is said that representatives of Iran and Israel allegedly spoke about the possibility of turning the Middle East into a nuclear weapon-free zone. A source from the Israeli nuclear energy commission has confirmed the fact of the talks, but provided no further comment.

Iran itself is denying reports of secret Iranian-Israeli talks on the use of nuclear energy in the Middle East. A representative of Iran's nuclear department, Ali Shirzadian, has described the report as a "lie, which represents some sort of a psychological operation intended to affect Iran's diplomatic successes in Geneva and Vienna."

As is known, Israel is unofficially considered to be the only Middle Eastern country to possess a nuclear weapon. As a matter fact, the Jewish state neither acknowledges nor denies this. Experts believe that an agreement between Iran and the group of six countries may translate logically into a demand from the international community that Israel either open its nuclear facilities to IAEA inspectors or prove that they do not exist…

German edition Spiegel Online has published an interview with Alastair Crook, who is also an expert on the Middle East and a former spy. "For the West it doesn't matter exactly when Iran will have a nuclear bomb. What is far more important is whether Israel will be able to put up with Tehran's claims to leadership in the region," Crook said, and added that "Iran has turned into a factor no-one can ignore". "Tehran has destroyed Israel's monopoly on nuclear weapons and the emergence of the Islamic Republic as a regional superpower is now inevitable," the expert said. 

Thus, Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak has urged the international community to prohibit Iran from engaging in any uranium-related activities. To meet this objective, he said it was necessary to apply severe sanctions in parallel with negotiations, The Jerusalem Post reports.

In any case, it is not known whether the strange talks between Iran and Israel were of a separate nature… 

Irreversible process

Therefore, let's repeat: many people are now convinced that Iran's emergence as a nuclear state is already inevitable. It is believed that by engaging in talks with the West, Iran wants to gain time for scientific research and then quickly design a bomb. So, is it possible that the US and Israel will decide to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities? Is it possible for Nobel Prize winner Barack Obama to hold another option up his sleeve?

Israel is worried that Iran is effectively manoeuvring to avoid the tightening of sanctions. But if this step fails, the next logical move would be the introduction of more severe sanctions against Iran, not a forceful intervention. 

Meanwhile, the positions of Russia and China are not clear at all. Chinese officials have been saying lately that Chinese-Iranian relations are developing rapidly, especially in trade and energy. At the same time, Russia has said that it cares only about the price of oil, which makes for an unstable Middle East. US State Secretary Hillary Clinton could not secure assurances of support for anti-Iranian sanctions during her latest visit to Moscow either. Besides, the Kremlin is not interested in Iran becoming a "normal country", rather than a "pariah state" because at stake are Iran's reserves of oil and gas and their transportation to world markets.

Besides, Russia has military contracts with Iran. The BBC reports that the deal on the delivery of C-300 missile defence systems to Iran has been frozen by Russia. However, a source in the Russian federal service for military and technical cooperation has indicated that Russia will continue cooperating with Tehran without breaching its international obligations…

Whether this is a coincidence or not, in parallel with the reports coming from Vienna it has transpired that Israel and the US have begun large-scale joint military exercises on missile defence. The Juniper Cobra exercises are to be joined by around 1000 servicemen from the US European command and Israeli forces. The training will focus on a missile defence system to be used against hypothetical ballistic rocket strikes from Iran. If this is not a message to Tehran, then what is? 

Some sources claim that the US is conducting tests in Nevada on bombing subsurface facilities. Earlier, the world media circulated reports that the Pentagon is building a 15-ton bomb in an underground bunker. The need for the use of force is also occasionally stressed by the Israeli military. In fact, suggestions are being made that a strike against Iranian nuclear facilities may go ahead, even without Washington's consent. 

Against this background, a retired military pilot and former director of the technological analysis department at the US De-fence Department, Ed Timberlake, has told The Washington Times what he believes will happen "if Israeli planes attack Iran". "In response, Iranian rockets will hit densely populated cities in Israel", "the US will have to intervene", "Tehran may inspire attacks on NATO troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and use Hamas and Hezbollah forces", "US troops will probably need to use both conventional and nonconventional arms". "And if Russia, China and North Korea decided to help Iran, overtly or covertly, the conflict may get out of hand". Not a very good prospect, is it? "If Iran does remain in isolation, then, as soon as its aircraft are destroyed and its supply of rockets is depleted, the whole planet and the Middle East will become much safer. However, the problem of Iranian-sponsored terrorism will not disappear," the analyst said.

In this context, the statement by the head of Iran's nuclear energy organization, Ali Akbar Salihi, is interesting. "Let's assume that we do have a nuclear bomb. Then tell us, where will we use it? Will we bomb Israel" By saying Israel, we mean the US. Who can equal the nuclear power of America?"

Does this mean that the international community should turn a blind eye to Iran's actions? It remains to be hoped that it will have the determination not only to prevent this from happening, but also to resolve the crisis surrounding Iran's nuclear agenda peacefully. Provided, of course, this is at all possible.