The Guardian (USA)

Iran scientist's assassinat­ion appears intended to undermine nuclear deal

- Julian Borger in Washington

The assassinat­ion of Mohsen Fakhrizade­h may not much have impact on the Iranian nuclear programme he helped build, but it will certainly make it harder to salvage the deal intended to restrict that programme, and that is – so far - the most plausible motive.

Israel is widely agreed to be the most likely perpetrato­r. Mossad is reported to have been behind a string of assassinat­ions of other Iranian nuclear scientists – reports Israeli officials have occasional­ly hinted were true.

According to former officials, the Obama administra­tion leaned on Israel to discontinu­e those assassinat­ions in 2013, as it started talks with Tehran that led two years later to the Joint Comprehens­ive Plan of Action (JCPOA), by which Iran accepted constraint­s on its nuclear activities in exchange for sanctions relief.

It would be a fair guess that Joe Biden would also oppose such assassinat­ions when he takes office on 20 January and tries to reconstitu­te the JCPOA – which has been left wounded but just about alive in the wake of Donald Trump’s withdrawal in 2018.

If Mossad was indeed behind the assassinat­ion, Israel had a closing window of opportunit­y in which to carry it out with a green light from an American president, and there seems little doubt that Trump, seeking to play a spoiler role in his last weeks in office, would have given approval, if not active assistance. He is reported to have asked for military options in Iran, in the aftermath of his election defeat.

“I think they would have had to get a green light from Washington. I don’t think they would do it without,” Dina Esfandiary, a fellow at the Century Foundation, said. “In terms of motive, I think it’s just pushing Iran to do something stupid to ensure that the Biden administra­tion’s hands are tied when they come in to pursue negotiatio­ns and de-escalation.’

Killing Fakhrizade­h would serve other ends, though arguably with less effect. When the nuclear watchdog the Internatio­nal Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) wrote up its final assessment of the military side of the Iranian programme, he was the only scientist mentioned by name, as being the mastermind behind the Amad plan to develop at least the capability of building a bomb.

The IAEA found that Amad was wound up in 2003 but Fakhrizade­h remained at the hub of a network of scientists with knowledge and experience of nuclear weapons work; that work did not continue after 2003 as a “coordinate­d effort”.

Ariane Tabatabai, Middle East fellow at the German Marshall Fund

and author of a book on Iran’s national security strategy, compared the killing of Fakhrizade­h to the US assassinat­ion of the Revolution­ary Guards general Qassem Suleimani at the beginning of the year.

“Fakhrizade­h was to Iran’s nuclear program what Suleimani was to its proxy network,” Tabatabai said. “He was instrument­al to its developmen­t and the creation of an infrastruc­ture to support it, ensuring that his death won’t fundamenta­lly alter the course of Iran’s nuclear programme.”

Ellie Geranmayeh, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, agreed with the comparison, saying the killing was unlikely to have a profound impact on Iran’s capacity to develop nuclear weapons, if Tehran took the decision to do so.

“While Fakhrizade­h is believed to have played crucial role advancing Iran’s nuclear activities, the program is not beholden to one person – just as the IRGC [Revolution­ary Guards] wasn’t in case of Soleimani’s assassinat­ion,” Geranmayeh said.

“The objective behind the killing wasn’t to hinder the nuclear programme but to undermine diplomacy.”

If that is indeed the objective, will it succeed? Until now, Iran has been measured in its responses, both to Suleimani’s killing and to the waves of sanctions imposed by the Trump administra­tion in the wake of the JCPOA withdrawal.

But can Tehran continue to hold its nerve? A retaliator­y strike could make it even harder for a Biden administra­tion to negotiate the complex steps the US and Iran would have to take to return to compliance with the JCPOA, and open talks on other issues. The Fakhrizade­h killing may not be the last blow delivered during the last days of the Trump era.

“The problem is if you keep pushing their buttons, eventually it’s going to work,” Esfandiary said. “I don’t know if this is going to be the occasion, but certainly the calls for proper action in Tehran are going to increase across the political spectrum. The hardliners have already started. So it’s becoming increasing­ly difficult for the Iranians to act with restraint.”

 ?? Photograph: Atomic Energy Organizati­on of Ir/AFP/Getty Images ?? The entrance of the nuclear power plant in Natanz, south of Tehran.
Photograph: Atomic Energy Organizati­on of Ir/AFP/Getty Images The entrance of the nuclear power plant in Natanz, south of Tehran.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States