PMD; A Case Under Pressure for Closure by the Agency

The potentially military nature of Iran's nuclear program, past and present PMD actions, are among the titles used for one of the most controversial open cases at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna, a case that may finally be resolved in about two weeks. In this regard, Abbas Araghchi, Iran's senior coordinator for the implementation of the JCPOA, expressed hope for a positive report from the Agency but warned that if there are obstacles to closing the PMD case, the implementation of the JCPOA would be halted and 'Iran will resume its nuclear activities.' Yukiya Amano, the Director General of the Agency, who presented the famous 2011 report to the Agency's Board of Governors during his management, now speaks of the final steps for presenting his review on this matter, although he states that this report will not be absolute. On Thursday, December 5, in a press conference at the Agency's headquarters in Vienna, Amano said, 'As I mentioned earlier, the report or assessment will not be black and white; we look at the whole picture as a system. Like a puzzle with multiple pieces. We currently have a better understanding of the issue, we are analyzing it, and we will present our review.' While Amano states that his report on the PMD case will not be black and white or absolute, the implementation of the agreement between Iran and the P5+1 is contingent upon its closure. The Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic has emphasized that actions such as removing the core of the Arak reactor can only occur after the PMD case is closed. In the days leading up to the December 15 meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors, speculation about this report has intensified, raising the question of whether the PMD case will ultimately be closed. Tarek Raouf, a former official of the IAEA, believes that the agency is under significant political pressure to close this case. He tells Radio Farda, 'The Agency is under considerable political pressure from the U.S. and some other countries to close this case. If you remember, last June, the U.S. Secretary of State said in a press conference that the U.S. knows Iran has taken actions but is not looking for Iran's confession and is looking ahead. Mr. Kerry can say this as a political matter, but the Agency cannot do this as a technical body.' Raouf, who is the disarmament program director at the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), points out that the three-month timeline set for the roadmap to conclude the PMD issue is short, and shares his prediction regarding the Director General's report with Radio Farda: 'It is likely that if the sampling from Parchin does not indicate anything specific, the Agency will say no nuclear material has been used for military purposes, and it will also state that some of Iran's explanations are somewhat acceptable to the Agency, and regarding other issues, the Agency will likely say the explanation provided was incomplete, and it will work with Iran on these issues under normal safeguards in the coming months. Consequently, the PMD issue will no longer be a special issue in the Board of Governors but will become a regular matter under safeguards between Iran and the Agency.' If such a report or another report is submitted by the Director General to the Board of Governors, this council, composed of 35 members, must decide on the closure of the PMD case. According to Article 14 of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the countries that reached a nuclear agreement with Iran, namely the U.S., the U.K., Russia, France, Germany, and China, which are members of the Board of Governors, must present a resolution to this council for 'taking necessary actions aimed at closing this issue without undermining the authority of the Board of Governors.' Raouf believes that the council generally does not disagree with the Director General's assessments. He tells Radio Farda, 'The Board of Governors usually agrees with and supports the Director General's opinion; sometimes it agrees on the condition that more technical information is provided on how the conclusions were reached. There is currently political pressure on the council to accept whatever the Director General presents. However, some countries, including Saudi Arabia, the UAE, or Israel, some of which are not members of the council, will likely express dissatisfaction.' The Director General's report is expected to be submitted to the Board of Governors slightly ahead of schedule, likely on December 2. This report, according to Amano, will not be 'black and white.' It is likely for this reason that the Director General emphasized on Thursday that after the expiration of the 'roadmap' timeline, Iran and the Agency will need new agreements to continue cooperation. Yukiya Amano stated, 'The framework of cooperation between Iran and the Agency, although it does not have a time frame, does not act automatically, and therefore another agreement is necessary.' This new agreement, which Raouf explains, 'will be another type of roadmap, although it will be given a different name, as not all issues will be resolved, and Iran and the Agency will continue to cooperate, but these issues will be examined at a technical level, not as remaining issues to be presented to the Board of Governors.' This assessment comes at a time when it is unclear whether Iran's red line for fulfilling its commitments under the JCPOA is the political closure of the controversial PMD case in the Board of Governors or whether it also includes technical details at the expert level.