The U.S. and the Nuclear Agreement with Iran

The fourth round of trilateral negotiations between U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, and EU representative Catherine Ashton concluded on Saturday, November 22, but the U.S. Secretary of State states that serious disagreements still exist between the two sides. This comes as reports indicate that the United States has announced its conditions for a potential agreement just two days before the deadline for a nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 group on Monday, December 3. According to the New York Times, the goal of the U.S. and its allies is to reach an agreement that allows them sufficient opportunity to respond to any potential violations of the agreement by the Islamic Republic. In such a scenario, these countries would be able to respond diplomatically and impose new economic sanctions against Tehran's behavior, while the option of military action would remain on the table. U.S. officials say that the agreement must slow Iran's nuclear program to the extent that if the country decides to build a nuclear bomb, it would need at least a year to produce the necessary materials. However, putting this goal into practice through a verifiable agreement has proven to be very difficult. The U.S. has long since removed the goal of eliminating Iran's enrichment capability from its agenda, a demand that Israel continues to insist upon. Israeli politicians believe that preventing Iran from enriching uranium is the most reassuring method to guarantee the elimination of the option of building a nuclear bomb. Thus, recent negotiations with Iran have focused on measures that would limit its ability to quickly build a nuclear bomb while allowing Tehran to maintain its enrichment capabilities for energy production and scientific research. Shortly after arriving in Vienna, the venue for this round of negotiations, Secretary Kerry has held four rounds of talks with Mohammad Javad Zarif over Thursday, Friday, and Saturday. A fundamental question concerns the number and type of centrifuges that Iran will be allowed to keep for its uranium enrichment. Another question is the fate of the current nuclear materials that Tehran possesses and could potentially be used in bomb-making. A third question pertains to the actions that will be implemented to limit Iran's plutonium production capacity, which can also be used to make a nuclear bomb. The duration of any agreement between Iran and the P5+1 will impact each of these issues. Meanwhile, Western representatives and Iran must agree on a plan for lifting current sanctions, which must also be structured in a way that preserves Western leverage in the event of a potential breakdown of the agreement. Iran currently has nearly 10,000 active centrifuges, which Tehran claims are used to supply fuel for power reactors. However, maintaining Iran's current capability to produce a nuclear bomb would not take long. In April, Mr. Kerry stated before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, "I think today the general public knows that we are working on a timeline of about two months for the so-called exit [of Iran from the agreement]." However, the time required to produce sufficient fissile material for a nuclear bomb and prepare it for mounting on a fighter jet or missile would take much longer than two months. Gary Seymour, a former senior National Security Council official and current head of a lobbying group called the Coalition Against a Nuclear Iran, believes that the timeline should be at least one year: "The enrichment time required [by Iran] must be increased to one year. They [the U.S. government] must ensure this to bring Congress and its allies on board." To meet this timeline, American negotiators and their counterparts from other countries initially proposed a ceiling of 1,500 centrifuges for Tehran. In this plan, Iran could maintain this number and refrain from using more advanced centrifuges for its nuclear program. However, Iran strongly rejected this proposal. Recently, some Iranians have mentioned a figure of 8,000 as a proposed ceiling for centrifuges. Today, on the eve of the deadline for reaching a nuclear agreement, some of the U.S. allies have already raised the possibility of extending this deadline again. However, the Obama administration is still reluctant to openly discuss extending this deadline for fear that such an action could increase pressure on Iran and push the Islamic Republic towards making a hard decision. Iran and the P5+1 group, which includes the United States, Britain, France, Russia, China, and Germany, have until December 3 to reach a comprehensive nuclear agreement. Iran's nuclear program has been stuck in a negotiation deadlock for over a decade, and a comprehensive agreement to address international concerns and ensure its peaceful nature has yet to be achieved. Iran and the P5+1 reached a temporary agreement in Geneva, Switzerland, on December 3 last year, under which Tehran suspended its uranium enrichment above five percent and halted activities at certain sites, including the Arak heavy water reactor and the Fordow facility. The member countries of this group also refrained from imposing new sanctions against Tehran and released some of Iran's frozen assets resulting from oil sales. The main disagreements between the parties revolve around the extent of continued enrichment in Iran, Tehran's responses to the agency's questions, and the manner of lifting international sanctions against the Islamic Republic.