U.N. Panel Puts Iran on Notice
Tehran is told it will face Security Council action unless it reins in its nuclear program. The Islamic Republic responds defiantly.

By Alissa J. Rubin and John Daniszewski
February 5, 2006
Los Angeles Times
Original Source: http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/la-fg-iaea5feb05,1,6277835.story



VIENNA — The United Nations' atomic energy agency voted overwhelmingly Saturday to report Iran to the U.N. Security Council for its nuclear program, and Tehran responded by announcing that it would restart efforts to enrich uranium, a procedure that could provide fuel for nuclear weapons as well as power plants.

Hours later, President Bush warned that the international community was committed to stopping Iran from building an atomic bomb.

The path chosen by Iran's new leaders — threats, concealment and breaking international agreements and IAEA seals — will not succeed and will not be tolerated by the international agency, Bush said. The regime's continued defiance only further isolates Iran from the rest of the world.

Under the resolution approved in Vienna by the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Iran must meet a series of demands, including the cessation of all uranium enrichment and full disclosure of its previous efforts to obtain nuclear technology. Otherwise it will face censure and possible sanctions by the Security Council.

The rapid-fire developments opened a new chapter in international relations with Iran and the broader Middle East. If Iran does not curb its nuclear ambitions, the region could see a preemptive attack on Iran's nuclear installations or an arms race among neighboring countries.

The international community has time to develop a strategy. Estimates by the Institute for Science and International Security in Washington suggest that Iran could produce enough highly enriched uranium for a bomb within three years of building a centrifuge plant. The U.S. has estimated such a capability would take 10 years.

The resolution was approved with the understanding that the matter will not come before the council until March, leaving Iran time to work out a deal. The one-month window satisfied a Russian demand to give Iran one last chance and was seconded by China, which, like Russia, has major commercial trade with Iran.

Twenty-seven countries on the 35-member board voted to report Iran to the Security Council. Five countries abstained: Libya, South Africa, Indonesia, Algeria and Belarus. Only Venezuela, Cuba and Syria voted against the resolution.

In defiance, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad late Saturday ordered Iran's Atomic Energy Organization to restart uranium enrichment, according to the official Iranian news agency.

The Iranian ambassador to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh, denounced the vote to report Iran to the Security Council as hasty and immature, saying that under a law passed by the Iranian parliament, the country has no choice but to restart enrichment and halt cooperation with the IAEA on snap inspections and voluntary disclosures.

Increasingly, Iran has appeared isolated. Its continuing defiance has unnerved many countries that had given Tehran the benefit of the doubt that its nuclear program was meant strictly for civilian energy purposes.

The measure had the backing of all five permanent Security Council members, as well as two Muslim countries, Egypt and Yemen, that had been reluctant to oppose Iran. They agreed to go along after the European Union and the United States accepted compromise language making it a goal to create a nuclear-free Middle East.

The support of Russia and China appeared firm. Both countries, aware of their power as brokers in the dispute between Iran and the West, took a softer tone than the United States and EU in the wake of Saturday's session. Their support was crucial to the Western authors of the resolution because either could veto any punitive measure before the Security Council.

A very important aspect of this board meeting is that Russia, China and the European Union stood together in sending this message, and it wasn't just those countries, it was Japan, it was Korea … it was Brazil, Argentina and India, it was the overwhelming majority of countries standing together and making it clear to the Iranian leadership that the course they are taking is not acceptable, said Gregory Schulte, the U.S. ambassador to U.N. agencies in Vienna. What we heard from board members was concern over the nature of Iran's nuclear program and the intentions of Iran's leadership.

British Ambassador Peter Jenkins said members of the board became uncomfortable about Iran's open defiance of the international community's request that it halt its nuclear activities. Board members cannot understand why Iran is so determined to develop nuclear technology, he said.

Nuclear politics in the Middle East are complex because of vast inequalities in the atomic capabilities of different countries. Israel has never acknowledged having nuclear weapons, but it is widely believed to have a large arsenal. Iran, which views itself as the leading Islamic power in the Middle East, has sharpened its anti-Israeli rhetoric since Ahmadinejad came to power.

None of the Arab countries have nuclear weapons. They are leery of Israel, but also of Iran, which is set apart from most of the Mideast by its language, Persian, and its non-Arab Shiite Muslim majority.

The Arab countries have been pushing for a Middle East free of atomic weapons, but if Iran developed nuclear arms, it might also set off an arms race in the region, several experts in nonproliferation said.

Although the Americans and Europeans publicly insist that sanctions are not yet under discussion, senior U.S. State Department officials said that a carefully ratcheted series of penalties had been worked out with the European Union. Initially, the council would probably just reiterate the atomic energy agency's request for compliance. If Iran failed to cooperate, the council would begin to look at penalties such as bans on visas for Iranian officials and export prohibitions on products needed by Iran's commercial sector.

Although Iran could respond by boosting the price of oil — it is the second largest producer in OPEC — its officials have sent mixed messages about whether it would pursue such a course, recognizing that it could hurt the country's friends as well as its enemies.

Iran and its allies have few illusions about what lies in store.

Despite the fact that the U.S. and Britain said they will not raise of the issue of sanctions, they are moving in that direction, said Syria's ambassador to the IAEA, Safwan Ghanem, after the vote.

For the United States, the vote represents the culmination of 2 1/2 years of lobbying. In 2002, the National Council of Resistance in Iran, a Paris-based group that opposes the current theocratic regime, provided information that the country had had a secret nuclear program for nearly two decades.

After the group's statements, the U.S. worked for nearly two years to win over the Europeans and successfully lobbied other countries to vote for the resolution.

Meanwhile, the U.N.'s atomic energy agency tried to nail down information about Iran's program, but found itself frequently blocked or given only grudging half answers. Two years ago, Iran entered into negotiations with the European Union. It suspended all nuclear processing as well as enrichment while trying to work out a package of economic benefits in exchange for an indefinite extension of its freeze on nuclear activities.

In August, shortly after the presidential election that swept populist conservative Ahmadinejad to power, Iran announced that the negotiations were unsatisfactory and restarted the process that turns raw uranium into gas for enrichment.

On Jan. 10, Iran broke the IAEA seals on its enrichment plant at Natanz and announced it would soon recommence research and development to increase its enrichment capability.

For Russia, which for months had defended Iran's right to manufacture nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes, the resumption of enrichment was a red line — all the more so because Moscow had offered Iran the option of entering into a joint venture in which the uranium would be enriched in Russia to a level suitable for civilian use and sent back to Iran for use in nuclear power plants.

With Russia backing a resolution to report Iran to the Security Council, China came on board as well. At a dinner meeting in London on Jan. 30, the five permanent members of the Security Council came to a consensus to report Iran.

We're reasonably satisfied with the results of this meeting, Russian Ambassador Grigory Berdennikov said Saturday. We think it was a very good decision in terms of the possibilities for the IAEA to continue its work on this very acute issue. And we hope that by March many issues will be resolved.

Chinese Ambassador Wang Guangya insisted that China objected to sanctions as a matter of principle, and preferred to seek a negotiated diplomatic solution.

I prefer a low-key approach. There is still room for parties to show flexibility and to work for a negotiated and diplomatic solution, he said. Why talk about sanctions now? We still have time to make all sides flexible to work out this diplomatic solution.

In a further effort to win votes from nonaligned countries, Washington used a combination of carrots and sticks. With India, the United States threatened to halt a deal to supply the country with nuclear technology for power plants unless it voted in favor.

Egypt consented only reluctantly late Friday after the Western powers agreed to add language, strongly opposed by Israel, stating that solving the Iranian problem would help in realizing the objective of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, including their means of delivery.

The United States tried to play down the significance of the change, and Schulte described it as part of the horse-trading.

In these board meetings … we work to bring as many countries on board as possible and we think the strong number of countries we have on board now sends a very powerful signal…. The resolution today is about Iran and the issue we put on the Security Council's agenda is Iran's noncompliance and the absence of international confidence in its nuclear program.