EU still a major part in Iran stand-off

By Andrew Beatty

Date: 15/09/05

When the International Atomic Energy Agency's (IAEA) board of governors take their seats in Vienna next Monday (19 September) the quiet shuffling of chairs is likely to signal the end of one of the most high-profile phases of European diplomacy in recent times.

For two years EU member states took the lead in trying to solve one of the major 'hard security' challenges of the day.

As the 35 representatives on the board of governors sit down, attempts to find a diplomatic solution to the stand-off over Iran's nuclear programme will shift from the EU3 of Germany, UK and France, leading, to the EU taking part; from Iran talking to the EU, to Iran talking to the world.

In July, almost two years of talks - which saw Iran suspend enrichment and reprocessing activities and sign up to international rules allowing more intrusive inspections - ended when Iran informed the IAEA that enrichment activities would resume.

The catalyst was the rejection, in August, of an EU deal asking for permanent suspension as a quid pro quo for trade and security benefits.

Disappointment among EU diplomats at Iran's response is still palpable a month later.

"The offer that the European side made to the Iranians was rejected rather brusquely," said one senior diplomat speaking in Brussels last week.

Others were even more blunt. "They did not even read it," said one diplomat who works on the Iran dossier.

The EU's position, for the coming weeks at least, seems clear: Iran has broken the rules in the past, the only way of building trust is to halt enrichment activities, Iran is not willing to do this, talks cannot continue.

"We have had a kind of time out from the IAEA's normal procedures," explained one senior EU diplomat. "It seems that that period has now come to an end."

Restarting negotiations now seems unlikely, but not impossible.

As far as the EU is concerned the default response to Iran's breaches of IAEA safeguards and undeclared activities must be referred to the United Nations Security Council.

With talks and, crucially, the suspension now over, diplomats say, that is what should happen. Unless meetings with Iran's new President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad on the sidelines of the UN summit in New York next week can result in a return to the negotiating table.

But trying to reach consensus among IAEA board members on referring Iran to the UN Security Council will be tricky, if not impossible, even for the combined efforts of the EU and US.

While China and Russia are the most obvious and high profile members who need to be convinced, other board members such as Argentina, Brazil, India, Pakistan and South Africa have all strongly supported non-nuclear states' right to nuclear technology.

One possible approach is for the EU to ask for the case to be sent to the UN without the threat of sanctions, in the hope of getting China, Russia and the rest on side.

But a solution is unlikely to be found via New York.

In the longer term a successful tightening of the rules of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) to make sure enrichment and separation activities are no longer permitted under civilian programmes could help close the gap in approaches towards Iran among the international community.

It could also force Iran to re-weigh the costs of obtaining military nuclear capabilities.

Iran's signature and practical application of the additional protocol of the non-proliferation treaty at the EU's behest showed that the country is wary of international condemnation.

If as suggested in a recent report from the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies, Iran's tactics could now be to peruse its weapons programme over the medium term, exploiting NPT loop-holes and working with the IAEA all the while, such an approach will become doubly important.

Meanwhile the underlying reasons for Iran pursuing an ambiguous nuclear programme should be addressed, as the EU attempted to do in its August offer.

Clearly the EU's global offer was not global enough.

The cost of Iran surrendering its nuclear threat will likely be more than "a new political and security relationship between Iran and Europe".

In addressing the questions of Iran's relations with the US, Israel, Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, there may yet be a role for the EU.

Article reports on the diplomatic efforts of the EU3 (France, Germany and the UK) during two years to move Iran towards giving up its nuclear enrichment programme. The initiative supposedly ended when the country declared it would resume its activities in the field in July 2005. Author discusses prospects for the international community to bring Iran to co-operate on the issue and what the EU's role in this might be.

• Primary Source