“Iran has now acknowledged that it has been developing, for 18 years, a uranium centrifuge program, and, for 12 years, a laser enrichment program,” said the report by the United Nations agency, released in early November, referring to technologies employed for making material that could be used in the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. “In that context Iran has admitted that it produced small amounts of LEU [low-enriched uranium], using both centrifuge and laser enrichment processes…and a small amount of plutonium.”

The report also stated that there is no evidence so far that Tehran has sought to build a nuclear bomb, as asserted by the U.S. government. The IAEA document said, however, that because of the “past pattern of concealment, it will take some time before the agency is able to conclude that Iran’s nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes.” IAEA head Mohammed ElBaradei said the agency would need “a particularly robust verification system,” requiring “full transparency and openness on the part of Iran.”

U.S. deputy undersecretary of state for arms control Richard Bolton called the agency’s conclusion “impossible to believe,” according to Reuters. Bolton added that the report confirms Washington’s insistence that “the massive and covert Iranian efforts to acquire sensitive nuclear capabilities make sense only as a part of a nuclear weapons program.”

A wide range of capitalist politicians and pundits in the United States made similar points. “It’s dumbfounding that the IAEA, after saying that Iran for 18 years had a secret effort to enrich uranium and separate plutonium, would turn around and say there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program,” said Thomas Cochran, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “If that’s not evidence, I don’t know what is.”

“Iran seems to have been caught at an early stage of a secret program,” said an editorial in the November 12 New York Times. “But nobody can be sure whether this is the whole truth or whether Iran simply admitted what it thinks international inspectors already know.”

The Times editors demanded Tehran come up with a lot more than what it has already offered to heed Washington’s dictates. “Under intense international pressure, Iran has now agreed to open itself to more intrusive inspections and suspend its uranium enrichment program, at least temporarily. That is not good enough. Iran has no legitimate need to pursue either enrichment or reprocessing technologies and should forswear both approaches entirely.”

Ali Akbar Salehi, Iran’s representative to the IAEA, confirmed that Iranian laboratories had produced “a very small quantity of plutonium,” but as “a secondary effect” of producing medicine for hospitals. The Iranian government has maintained its nuclear industry is for energy purposes only, but revealed it had not disclosed certain experiments.

The IAEA governing board is scheduled to meet November 20 to decide whether the Iranian government has violated the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), which Tehran has signed. An affirmative finding would mean the matter would automatically be placed on the UN Security Council agenda for discussion of possible sanctions.

“While Britain, Germany and France may argue that Iran’s new co-operativeness should be rewarded, America is expected to call for Iran’s breaches to the NPT to be reported to the United Nations Security Council,” said the London-based Economist magazine.

Salehi warned that such a move could lead to “unpredictable consequences.” He called on the governments of France, Germany, and Britain to stick by an agreement with Tehran they had announced in October to not back efforts by Washington to declare Iran in violation of the NPT. In exchange, the Iranian government agreed to allow surprise UN inspections of its nuclear facilities and temporarily suspend its uranium enrichment program. Paris, Berlin, and Moscow were the chief architects of pressuring Tehran to take this step, hoping to derail the U.S. government’s efforts. These governments have competing interests with Washington in Iran, including some lucrative investments.

According to an article in the November 12 New York Times, U.S. diplomats are feverishly negotiating for language that could be adopted by the November 20 IAEA meeting to keep up the pressure on Iran. “Let’s face it. A resolution of non-compliance is not going to happen,” an un-named U.S. diplomat told Reuters. “The question is, is there some fallback that the three European countries can live with.”

Using imperial language, Bolton said if Tehran takes all the steps Washington demands, such as allowing unannounced inspections of all its nuclear facilities, this would be a “major advance toward its integration into civilized society.”

In London, British foreign secretary Jack Straw said his government had “some differences of emphasis” with Washington on Tehran’s nuclear record. “We should be reacting calmly to the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency,” he told the BBC. Straw added that while Tehran had concealed nuclear activities in the past, the country had recently cooperated substantially.

In mid-October, Moscow suspended plans to start up a nuclear power plant in southern Tehran being built with Russian assistance. During a visit to Moscow just before the release of the IAEA report, Hassan Rowhani, head of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, announced that Tehran would send a letter to the IAEA confirming its agreement to allow surprise inspections of its nuclear facilities. Russian president Vladimir Putin said that as a result he saw “no obstacles to nuclear cooperation with Iran.” Washington has been pressing Moscow for years to end its nuclear assistance to Tehran.  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home