Reuters Analytical Report: Iran's Nuclear Crisis at Risk of 'Reignition'

Reuters has published an analytical report examining the Iranian nuclear crisis from various aspects. According to the report co-authored by Arshad Mohammed, John Irish, Jonathan Landy, and Parisa Hafezi, published on Friday, May 5, as the U.S. and its European allies grapple with Russia's invasion of Ukraine and rising tensions with China, the Iranian nuclear crisis is at risk of reigniting. The report cites three European officials stating that the UK, France, and Germany have warned the Islamic Republic of Iran that if it enriches uranium to levels suitable for nuclear weapons, they will reinstate UN sanctions against Iran. This threat, which was sent last year in an unreported letter by the foreign ministers of these countries, underscores Western fears that Iran could produce uranium with a 90% purity level. These concerns intensified in February after UN inspectors discovered uranium particles with a purity of 83.7% at Iran's Fordow nuclear facility, which is built underground to protect against airstrikes. The authors of this analytical piece say that a renewed crisis over Iran comes at an inconvenient time for U.S. President Joe Biden, who is focused on maintaining allied support for the war in Ukraine and uniting Western countries to counter China's military and diplomatic ambitions. While some White House aides may prefer to keep the Iran issue off the president's desk, officials and analysts believe they may not have that option. A Western diplomat, who wished to remain anonymous, said, 'They are preoccupied with Ukraine and Russia and do not want to open another front right now.' He added, 'Therefore, they want to do everything they can to prevent this from happening, namely Iran achieving 90% enriched uranium.' According to the report, Western officials are concerned that a nuclear-armed Iran could threaten Israel and Arab oil-producing countries in the Gulf, leading to a regional arms race. Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons. Since the failure of indirect U.S.-Iran negotiations to revive the nuclear agreement (JCPOA) among Iran, the UK, China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United States, American and European officials have been seeking ways to contain the Islamic Republic's program. This agreement, aimed at keeping Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, required the Islamic Republic to accept limits on its nuclear program and broader UN inspections in exchange for the lifting of UN, U.S., and EU sanctions. The agreement, which limited Iran's uranium enrichment to 3.67%, was abandoned by the U.S. in 2018. Former President Donald Trump claimed the agreement was too lenient toward the Islamic Republic. Trump reimposed extensive U.S. sanctions, many of which have secondary effects forcing non-American companies to cease dealings with Iran or risk losing access to the U.S. market, but UN sanctions were not reactivated. The agreement outlined a procedure for the 'rapid reinstatement' of UN sanctions against Iran— including oil sanctions and banking restrictions—without the possibility of veto in response to Iranian violations. Each of the signatory countries of the original agreement could initiate the rapid reinstatement process. U.S. sanctions—even with their secondary effects—have not deterred Iran from producing higher purity levels of uranium, and China has overlooked this by purchasing Iranian oil, leaving it unclear whether UN actions would be more effective. If the agreement is not revived, the West has three broad options: deterrence, military action, or a new negotiation arrangement. However, Iran may refrain from enriching to 90% to avoid the public rebuke that would accompany the reinstatement of UN sanctions. A senior nuclear official of the Islamic Republic stated that the Iranian government would not be indifferent to the return of UN sanctions. He told Reuters, 'If other parties provoke it for any reason, they will be responsible for all the consequences. Iran's response could be withdrawal from the NPT, the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, or accelerating nuclear activities.' Withdrawal from the NPT would pave the way for Iran to acquire nuclear weapons. This Iranian official's threat was more explicit than the remarks of the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson, who only said on Monday that Iran had informed Western powers how it would respond. It remains unclear whether these 83.7% enriched particles were produced intentionally. However, Western officials and analysts say that Iran's production of 90% uranium would warrant a significant response. A U.S. State Department spokesperson said Joe Biden is 'fully committed' to ensuring that Iran never obtains nuclear weapons. He noted the possibility of military action, stating, 'We believe diplomacy is the best way to achieve this goal, but President Biden has also made it clear that we have not ruled out any options.' As Western officials seek to keep diplomatic doors open, tensions with Russia and China complicate this effort. Disputes over the Ukraine war, which has been accompanied by Iranian military assistance to Russia, and rising tensions between China and the U.S. further reduce the likelihood of reviving this agreement, as it remains unclear how much Moscow or Beijing can exert to revive it. If the agreement is not revived, the West has three broad options: deterrence, military action, or a new negotiation arrangement. Deterrence has a downside: it could give the Islamic Republic the opportunity to move toward nuclear weapons capability. Dennis Ross, a veteran American diplomat now at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, says Biden may need to do more to scare Iran about the consequences of enriching to higher levels. He said, 'If you do not take sufficient action to convince the Iranians of the dangers they face, at some point you will face a crisis because they will go to [enrichment] 90% or move toward weaponization.' This piece is based on a Reuters report.