Iran Review

Dr. Davood Hermidas Bavand

Iran had proposed to the countries sitting at the negotiations table over its nuclear issue that it was ready to purchase fuel with 20% enrichment. This is not an issue that had not been put forward by Iran.

Generally speaking, two proposals were offered at that time; first for Iran to swap 1250 kg of its 3.5-percent-enriched uranium with 20-percent-enriched uranium in several stages; and secondly for Iran to purchase the fuel it needs for its Tehran research reactor from other countries by paying the costs. Finally, the outcome of the talks between Iran and 5+1 was based on swap of Iran’s 3.5% uranium with the 20% enriched fuel prepared in another country.

The question is that although the Tehran reactor is a research reactor and basically could not be used for military and non-peaceful purposes, why the Westerners are insisting on supplying the fuel for the reactor. In response, it can be said that the concern voiced by the Western countries is not about the Tehran research reactor at all but rather the uranium enriched in the country. Therefore, their aim is to transfer the current amount of the uranium enriched in Iran to outside the country. In other words, their problem is the present 1250 kg of uranium and also preventing the enrichment process of 20-percent uranium fuel. Accordingly, they allege that once uranium is enriched above that grade it could be used for military purposes. However, they are after eliminating their own concern. They rather intend to remove their concern and prevent further enrichment of uranium in Iran.

Western countries, especially the United States are also persuading the idea of imposing new sanctions against Iran. Recently, the US secretary of state has made remarks in this regard and said one aim the US would follow in its new sanctions would be human rights pressures. It should be said that Mrs. Clinton’s stance is being influenced by the US public opinion and viewpoints ruling over the US Congress and Senate. In the US Senate there are people like McCain, Lieberman and others who in the issue of pressurizing Iran give priority to human rights issues. To this end, the US foreign policy apparatus has adopted such a stance in the light of the atmosphere created by some Congress and Senate representatives and a number of US non-governmental organizations. Furthermore, in the economic domain last month the US approved a motion to impose gasoline sanctions on Iran. The effectiveness of the plan will depend on two factors: either the US would unilaterally impose the sanctions or would take up the issue to the UN Security Council for adoption. In the latter case, and according to Paragraph 5 of Article 2 of the UN Charter, all member states in the United Nations should comply with the approvals of the Security Council. Therefore, prior to such a move by Western countries, Iran should play, at the best possible place, with the cards at its disposal in international arena. If Iran’s nuclear case fails to be returned to the Security Council, Tehran could act more powerfully in the international scene with an aim to realize its aims. The required background under such circumstances is adopting logical and sound decisions and choosing a reliable process in international behavior. But, if Iran’s case is returned to the Security Council again, the situation will change and Iran should accordingly make different decisions. However, if preventive measures are not adopted in this regard, UN Security Council member states will approve mechanisms for implementation of new sanctions.

Under such circumstances, approach and behavior of two Security Council members would be effective. Russia and China, by adopting a different decision, could prevent enforcement of anti-Iran sanctions. Up to recently it seemed that Russia was fully on Iran’s side but in the aftermath of raising the issue of the missile shield in Bulgaria, Russia has taken new stands. Therefore, if a decision is expected to be drawn by P5+1 or members of the Security Council, Russia would adjust its position with Iran but would not drastically change its approach in support of Iran. In the case of China, Western countries, the US in particular, have been trying to force the country to participate in new and extended anti-Iran sanctions and even used different tools such as import tariffs for Chinese goods in order to impose pressures on the Chinese government. But, so far they have failed in their attempts.

Therefore, China is not fully keeping side with Western countries or at least would adopt an unattainable stance. To this end, it seems that all should wait for the policy that P5+1 would adopt and should not suffice on the stances of those countries and speculations that are made over the outcome of the issue.

Source: Etemaad Newspaper
Translated By: Iran Review