Iran makes moves with IAEA, ballistic missiles – what are they up to?
A source told the semi-official Mehr news agency on Tuesday that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) has resolved nuclear issues with Iran relating to one of three sites being investigated over the presence of uranium particles.
The agency’s alleged case regarding the findings of uranium particles with 83.7 purity has also been closed.
The IAEA is due to issue quarterly reports on Iran this week, ahead of a regular meeting of its 35-nation Board of Governors next week. It last week said it tested a ballistic missile with a range of 2,000 kilometers.
What is Tehran’s game? Is this campaign being done by using “carrots” (giving the IAEA more data that it had previously withheld), by “sticks” (new and longer range tests of ballistic missiles) or both?
Regarding the IAEA probes, it is unclear if anything at all happened Tuesday. The IAEA issued no public statement, only Iran did. Further, requested clarification from the IAEA, and at press time the international inspectors issued no response to back up Iran’s claims.
In the past, when only Iran claimed some positive movement with the IAEA or the West, it proved to be wishful thinking and an attempt to pressure other parties into accepting Iranian terms which were under negotiation, but which remained in dispute. So Tehran could be lying.
Alternatively, there could be some truth to Iran’s claims or a partial deal on the way, but even this would not necessarily be a game-changer. To date, the IAEA has a number of accusations against Iran that need clearing up.
IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi has said repeatedly from 2020-2022 that “Iran has not provided explanations that are technically credible in relation to the agency’s findings at three undeclared locations in Iran. Nor has Iran informed the agency of the current location, or locations, of the nuclear material and/or of the equipment contaminated with nuclear material, that was moved from Turquzabad in 2018.”
Further, he has said that “unless and until Iran provides technically credible explanations for the presence of uranium particles of anthropogenic origin at Turquzabad, Varamin and ‘Marivan’ and informs the agency of all current locations of the nuclear material and/ or of the contaminated equipment, the agency cannot confirm the correctness and completeness of Iran’s declarations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement.”
Then, three months ago, Iran was caught with a small number of molecules of uranium enriched to the 84% level at the Fordow facility. All that Iran is currently claiming has been resolved is the latest 84% incident, and one of the three undeclared sites known alternately as Marivan/Abadeh.
The Turquzabad and Varamin sites and issues would still be open, including illicit traces of uranium found at Turquzabad and a variety of questions about missing nuclear weapons testing equipment from Iran’s nuclear archives which the Mossad seized in 2018.
Moreover, this would not be the first probe closed against Iran, and the last time a probe was closed in March 2022 relating to an illicit metal disc of nuclear material, there was no less pressure by the IAEA on Tehran regarding the remaining open probes.
So the carrot here may be weak. But the stick may not be stronger.
Iran’s claims last week that it launched a ballistic missile with a 2,000km. range led to loud condemnations across the globe, but did it really give Iran anything it did not already have and did it cross any of the ballistic missile boundaries that could be game-changers? It looks like it clearly did not.
The International Institute for Strategic Studies, a British think-tank, has campaigned in recent years to promote a Western European talking point of letting Iran keep its existing ballistic missile stock, as long as it does not increase their range. The goal is a limit of 2,000km., because that would stave off the development of missiles that could directly threaten western Europe.
Even a few years before this last ballistic missile test, Iran’s existing Shahab-3, Emad-1 and Sejjil were estimated to be able to strike up to 2,000km. away, meaning they can already easily strike Israel, Saudi Arabia and much of eastern Europe. In contrast, to reliably reach western Europe, the ballistic missiles would need to have a range of 3,000km.
A report by the think tank tip-toes around the issue that the Khorramshahr missile has a maximum range of 2,000km., but with independent experts’ assessments suggest it could reach greater distances of up to 3,000km., if armed with a lighter warhead.
But the working assumption remains that Iran is still 1,000km. short from being able to threaten western Europe; the latest ballistic missile test does not change this critical calculus.
But what it does do is remind western Europe that if the sanctions continue, the Islamic Republic could increase its ballistic missile’s range to a point where it could threaten it, even if the threshold is never crossed.
Threatening the US, on the other hand, is a whole different game. The ayatollahs would need to get into the 10,000km. range to do that.
Theoretically, top arms control expert Jeffrey Lewis wrote in December 2021 that a modified Sarir satellite launching rocket might be able to carry 1,000 kilograms for 7,0009,000km. That is closer to striking distance. So the latest test is also maybe a vague threat to the US.
It does seem that Iran wants to bribe and threaten the US and the EU to avoid a confrontation at the UN Security Council. The question is what impact these relatively weak moves will have on IAEA Board decision-makers from those countries.