ISIS Calls New IAEA-Iran Agreement 'Flawed'

David Albright and Jacqueline Shire at the Institute for Science and International Security have published a new report calling the Agreement between the International Atomic Energy Agency and Iran on outstanding issues "flawed in important ways."

Among criticisms of the Agreement outlined in the new report are:
"The agreement states that aside from the issues identified in the document, there are 'no other remaining issues and ambiguities regarding Iran's past nuclear program and activities.' This is a sweeping statement that sets an unfortunate precedent regarding Iran's past nuclear activities, about which little is known in important areas. The document also refers to closing files, suggesting that IAEA or member states could be blocked from raising the issue again, even if significant new information emerged. The idea of 'closing files' violates fundamental safeguards principles.

"The agreement does not specify that Iran would provide the IAEA access to key people, facilities, and documents that are needed to verify Iranian answers to the IAEA's questions. Previous IAEA reports have noted the need for access to specific people and places . Without verification, Iranian answers cannot be accepted as truthful, given the many times Iran has misled IAEA inspectors.

"It also does not mention the matter of Iran's adherence to the Additional Protocol, without which it is all but impossible for the IAEA to ensure that Iran does not have undeclared nuclear materials and facilities, or verify Iran's statements under this agreement."

Click here to download the full report.

Iran's Agreement with the IAEA

Click here to download the pdf version.

Information Circular INFCIRC/71 1

Date: 27 August 2007

General DistributionOriginal: English

Communication dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the Agency concerning the text of the "Understandings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues."

The Secretariat has received a Note Verbale dated 27 August 2007 from the Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran, attaching the text of the “Understandings of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues.” The Note Verbale and, as requested therein, the attached document are herewith attached for information.

-------------------

Permanent Mission ofISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF IRAN to the International Atomic Energy Agency(IAEA) Heinestr. 19/1/1 A-1020 Vienna/AustriaPhone: (0043-1) 214 09 71 Fax: (0043-1) 114 09 73 E-mail: PM. Iran_AEA@chello.at No. 083/2007 27 August 2007

The Permanent Mission of Islamic Republic of Iran to the International Atomic Energy Agency presents its compliments to the Agency's Secretariat and has the honor to request the text of the "Understandings of Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues- to be circulated among the Member States and publish it as an INFCIRC document and make it available to the public through the IAEA website.

The Permanent Mission of Islamic Republic of Iran to the International Atomic Energy Agency avails itself of this opportunity to renew to the Agency's Secretariat the assurances of its highest consideration.

Office of External Relations and Policy Co-ordination

Attn: Mr. Vilmos CSERVENY Director, IAEA, P.O. Box 100,A-1400 Vienna

------------------

Understandings of The Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues Tehran
21 August 2007

Pursuant to the negotiations between H.E. Dr. Larijani, I. R. of Iran's Secretary of Supreme National Security Council and H.E. Dr. ElBaradei, Director General of the IAEA, in Vienna; following the initiative and good will of the Islamic Republic of Iran and the agreement made, a high ranking delegation consisting of the directors of technical, legal and political departments of the IAEA, paid a visit to Tehran from 11 to 12 July 2007 during which “Understandings of The Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA on the Modalities of Resolution of the Outstanding Issues, Tehran 12 July 2007” were prepared.

A second meeting took place in Vienna on 24 July 2007 followed by a further meeting in Iran from 20 to 21 August 2007. The Agency's delegation had the opportunity to have meetings with H.E. Dr. Larijani during both visits to Tehran. Following these three consecutive meetings, both Parties reached the following understandings:

I. Latest Developments:

Based on the modalities agreed upon on 12 July 2007, the following decisions were made:

1. Present Issues:

A. Enrichment Programme

The Agency and Iran agreed to cooperate in preparing the safeguards approach for the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant in accordance with Iran's Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement. The draft text of the safeguards approach paper, and the facility attachment of IRN- were provided to Iran on 23 July 2007. The safeguards approach and the facility attachment were discussed during technical meetings in Iran between the Agency and the AEOI from 6 to 8 August 2007. Further discussions will be held with the aim of finalizing the facility attachment by the end of September 2007.

B. Heavy Water Research Reactor in Arak

Iran agreed with the Agency's request to visit the heavy water research reactor (IR40) site in Arak. A successful visit took place on 30 July 2007.

C. Designation of new inspectors

On 12 July 2007, Iran accepted the designation of five additional inspectors.

D. Issue of multiple entry visas

On 12 July 2007, Iran agreed to issue one year multiple entry visas for 14 inspectors and staff of the Agency.

2. Past Outstanding Issues:

A. Plutonium Experiments

In order to conclude and close the file of the issue of plutonium (Pu), the Agency provided Iran with the remaining questions on 23 July 2007. During a meeting in Iran between representatives of the Agency and Iran, Iran provided clarifications to the Agency that helped to explain the remaining questions. In addition, on 7 August 2007, Iran sent a letter to the Agency providing additional clarifications to some of the questions.

On 20 August 2007 the Agency stated that earlier statements made by Iran are consistent with the Agency.s findings, and thus this matter is resolved. This will be communicated officially by the Agency to Iran through a letter.

B. Issue of P1-P2

Based on agreed modalities of 12 July 2007, Iran and the Agency agreed the following procedural steps to resolve the P1-P2 issue. The proposed timeline assumes that the Agency announces the closure of the Pu-experiments outstanding issue by 31 August 2007, and its subsequent reporting in the Director General.s report to the September 2007 Board of Governors.

The Agency will provide all remaining questions on this issue by 31 August 2007. Iran and the Agency will have discussions in Iran on 24-25 September 2007 to clarify the questions provided. This will be followed up by a further meeting in mid-October 2007 to further clarify the written answers provided. The Agency's target date for the closure of this issue is November 2007.

C. Source of Contamination

Based on the agreed modalities on 12 July 2007 and given the Agency's findings which tend, on balance, to support Iran's statement about the foreign origin of the observed HEU contamination, the only remaining outstanding issue on contamination is the contamination found at a Technical University in Tehran.

Iran and the Agency agreed on the following procedural steps to address this issue, starting once the P1-P2 issue is concluded and the file is closed. The Agency will again provide Iran with the remaining questions regarding the contamination found at a Technical University in Tehran by 15 September 2007. After 2 weeks of the closure of the P1-P2 issue Iran and the Agency will have discussions in Iran on this issue.

D. U Metal Document

Upon the request of the Agency, Iran agreed to cooperate with the Agency in facilitating the comparison of the relevant sections of the document. Iran is presently reviewing the proposals already made during the first meeting on 12 July 2007. After taking this step by Iran, the Agency undertakes to close this issue.

II. Modalities of Resolution of other Outstanding Issues

A. Po210

Based on agreed modalities of 12 July 2007, Iran agreed to deal with this issue, once all the above mentioned issues are concluded and their files are closed. Iran and the Agency agreed upon the following procedural steps: regarding this issue, the Agency will provide Iran in writing with all its remaining questions by 15 September 2007. After 2 weeks from conclusion and closure of the issues of the source of contamination and U-metal, reflected in the Director General's report to the Board of Governors, Iran and the Agency will have discussions in Iran where Iran will provide explanations on the Po2 10.B.

Ghachine Mine

Based on agreed modalities of 12 July 2007, Iran agreed to deal with this issue, once the issue of Po210 is concluded and its file is closed. Iran and the Agency agreed upon the following procedural steps: regarding this issue, the Agency will provide Iran in writing with all its remaining questions by 15 September 2007. After 2 weeks from conclusion and closure of the issue of Po2 10, reflected in the Director General's report to the Board of Governors, Iran and the Agency will have discussions in Iran where Iran will provide explanations to the Agency about Ghachine Mine.

III. Alleged Studies

Iran reiterated that it considers the following alleged studies as politically motivated and baseless allegations. The Agency will however provide Iran with access to the documentation it has in its possession regarding: the Green Salt Project, the high explosive testing and the missile re-entry vehicle.As a sign of good will and cooperation with the Agency, upon receiving all related documents, Iran will review and inform the Agency of its assessment.

IV. General Understandings

1. These modalities cover all remaining issues and the Agency confirmed that there are no other remaining issues and ambiguities regarding Iran's past nuclear program and activities.

2. The Agency agreed to provide Iran with all remaining questions according to the above work plan. This means that after receiving the questions, no other questions are left. Iran will provide the Agency with the required clarifications and information.

3. The Agency's delegation is of the view that the agreement on the above issues shall further promote the efficiency of the implementation of safeguards in Iran and its ability to conclude the exclusive peaceful nature of the Iran's nuclear activities.

4. The Agency has been able to verify the non-diversion of the declared nuclear materials at the enrichment facilities in Iran and has therefore concluded that it remains in peaceful use.

5. The Agency and Iran agreed that after the implementation of the above work plan and the agreed modalities for resolving the outstanding issues, the implementation of safeguards in Iran will be conducted in a routine manner.

Presidential Candidates on Negotiating with Iran

Council for a Livable World today released responses to seven critical questions on national security issues that were posed to all declared presidential candidates from both parties. Joseph Biden, Hillary Clinton, Christopher Dodd, John Edwards, Barack Obama, and Bill Richardson responded to the Council’s questionnaire. Their responses exhibited noteworthy unity while differing on some important details.

The seven questions were on reducing nuclear weapons stockpiles, new nuclear weapons, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, Iraq, space weapons, nuclear non-proliferation, and negotiating with Iran and North Korea. Click here to view the entire resource.

Question #7 asked Candidates about direct negotiations with Iran and North Korea:

Do you support or oppose direct negotiations with Iran and North Korea that would include incentives for Iran not to build nuclear weapons and North Korea to eliminate verifiably its nuclear weapons program?

The candidates all endorsed negotiations with Iran and North Korea and demonstrated an awareness of the value and importance of diplomacy and international engagement in solving some of the toughest nuclear non-proliferation problems.

Biden, Clinton, Edwards, and Richardson all made clear that negotiations are required to achieve a successful outcome and are a necessary part of leadership, not some sort of capitulation or concession.

Biden said that direct talks “could add to, not take away from” the Six-Party talks with North Korea and EU-3 talks with Iran.

Clinton referred to her engagement strategy as “robust diplomacy” and contrasted it with the “cowboy diplomacy of the Bush-Cheney administration.”

Edwards called for cooperating “with other great powers to isolate Iran and to offer Iran economic incentives.” On North Korea, Edwards said that “We must engage the country directly, through the Six Party framework, placing economic and political incentives on the table.”

Obama was the only candidate to explicitly state that he “will not take the military option off the table” in confronting these threats, but he reiterated that “our first measure must be sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy.”

Richardson mentioned that “no nation has ever been forced to renounce nuclear weapons,” but rather that “many nations have been convinced to renounce them.” He explained that “meaningful sanctions accompanied by positive incentives and security guarantees” were the right approach. Richardson also cited his personal experience in negotiating with troublesome regimes, adding that “When the North Koreans want to re-engage the U.S., they call me, because they trust me.”

New Round of IAEA and Iran Talks Ends with Modality

Two days of talks between the International Atomic Energy Agency led by Olli Heinonen and Iranian nuclear negotiators led by Javad Vaeedi ended today with an agreement on what they are calling a “modality” for moving forward on negotiations on Iran’s nuclear program. The “modality” includes four to five steps in the next two to three weeks to resolve outstanding issues. Jeffrey Lewis posted on what he prefers to call the "action plan" here.