Israel Worries Iran Will Get Sanctions Relief Without Capping Nuclear Program

"If Iran thinks it can use this time to build more leverage and then come back and say they want something better it simply won't work. We and our partners won't go for it," US Special Envoy for Iran, Robert Malley, told the BBC News Hour.

But Iran has already built leverage, according to Fars news agency in Tehran affiliated with the Revolutionary Guard. In an article signed by a writer with hardliner credentials on Sunday, questioning an interim or partial deal, the hardline media outlet said that Western estimates of Iran being a few weeks away from having enough enriched uranium for a bomb are true.

Indirect nuclear talks between the United States and Iran, with the participation of major powers, resume on Monday after a five-month hiatus, while the idea of an interim deal has been mentioned in recent days. Iran has rejected the idea, but the Fars article leaves the door ajar.

It seems that negotiations have already started even before the first meeting convenes in Vianna. "If that's Iran's approach, which is to try to use the negotiations as cover for an accelerated nuclear program, and as I say, drag its feet at the nuclear table, we will have to respond in a way that is not our preference," said Malley, who heads up the US negotiating team. "Nobody should be surprised if at that point there is increased pressure on Iran.

"We hope not to get that there, but if we are, then pressure will have to increase to send a message to Iran that the choice it is making is the wrong one. That it has a different path available to it, but it's not a path open indefinitely because Iran's nuclear program is putting the very essence of the deal negotiated (in 2015) at risk," he said.

But Fars said in its article that the West has few tools to exert more pressure on Iran, given the energy crunch in the world, arguing that some countries are willing to clandestinely buy oil from Iran.

Fars also said that the West is clearly concerned about advances Iran has made and its decision to restrict monitoring by UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). That is why they are eager for a partial agreement that would stop Iran’s higher-degree uranium enrichment in exchange for reduction of sanctions on Iran’s oil exports. But the US is not willing to provide permanent guarantees that reduced sanctions would not be reversed in the future, Fars argued.

The article went on to say that interim or partial agreements in Iran’s 18-year nuclear talks with the West is not a new idea and was tried before with mixed results, and will not work in this case. Iran has been demanding the full removal of all US sanctions imposed since 2018 and if Tehran accepts an interim deal, it will mean it buckled under the pressure of sanctions.

But the Fars article does not reject the idea of an interim deal altogether and says, “If the West is willing to make serious concessions over Iran’s oil sales and the repatriation of the proceeds, it might be possible to theoretically consider [an interim deal], provided that Iran’s presence in the global oil market is guaranteed.”

Since previous United States president Donald Trump pulled the US from the agreement in 2018, Washington has imposed ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions while Iran has since 2019 expanded its nuclear program beyond JCPOA limits.

The US presidential envoy on Iran, Robert Malley, told US public radio (NPR) this week that he was waiting to see what the new Iranian negotiators appointed by president Ebrahim Raisi (Raeesi) would “say when they’re at the table” when the Vienna talks resume.

“Obviously the indications they've given − and we're not the only ones who've heard those indications − are not particularly encouraging,” Malley said.

The envoy criticized Iran’s expressed desire for American guarantees that it would not withdraw once again from the deal, once renewed: “If those are the kinds of demands they make, that's tantamount to saying, we don't really want a deal; we just want to spend the next few months building our nuclear program.”

Plan B

NPR also interviewed Michael Singh, a senior security official in the George W Bush administration, who argued that the Biden administration − which came to office committed to reviving the JCPOA but has continued maximum pressure sanctions and introduced new ones − needed a ‘plan B’.

Malley told NPR only that the US was looking at “other efforts – diplomatic and otherwise” to curb Iran’s nuclear program. He said that if Tehran started “getting too close, too close for comfort [to capacity to make a weapon], then, of course, we will not be prepared to sit idly by.”

The administration of President Joe Biden is under domestic pressure with its popularity falling since the August withdrawal from Afghanistan. Some top Democrats in Congress are lukewarm at best and nearly all Republicans strongly opposed.

Formal talks in Vienna are between the remaining members of the JCPOA – China, France, Germany, Iran, Russia and the United Kingdom – so adding the complication that the US delegation in the Austrian capital takes part only indirectly.

Russia, China, Europe

Russia and China have called on both the US and Iran to return to the JCPOA, while insisting there is special onus on Washington as the party that left the agreement, even after it voted in favor at the United Nations Security Council.

While the three western European states’ position is formally similar to Russia and China – calling on both Washington and Tehran to adhere to the JCPOA – the E3 has expressed growing concern at the expanding Iranian nuclear program and at Iran’s limiting its cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to that required under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).

The E3 told the IAEA board meeting this week that the Iran’s atomic activities, especially enriching uranium to 60 percent and using more advanced centrifuges, was “irreversibly reducing the counter-proliferation value of the JCPOA.”

Russia in contrast played down concerns over Iran expressed by IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi. Moscow’s IAEA ambassador Mikhail Ulyanov said these were a “constant irritant” but had “little practical meaning in terms of proliferation risks.” Ulyanov accepted that while these issues needed to be “clarified and closed” the real challenge was restoring the JCPOA.

GCC, Israel

The Gulf Cooperation Council, in a statement from its Iran working group November 17, supported a return to the JCPOA, moderating its past opposition. The GCC said renewal would “help pave the way for inclusive diplomatic efforts to address all issues that are necessary to ensure sustainable safety, security and prosperity in the region.”

But Israel has maintained strong opposition to JCPOA revival. Defense Minister Benny Gantz said this week that any Iran agreement should restrict its missile program and regional alliances. Gantz emphasized his government’s commitment to “build our military might,” which Israeli media reported led to $1.5 billion allocated October for preparations to attack Iran.

In a long article published Saturday defending Iran’s nuclear diplomacy, the Islamic Republic News Agency said that in the last two months Iran’s position crystalized around three pre-conditions, after the new government of President Ebrahim Raisi reviewed the previous six rounds of talks in Vienna from April to June.

First, the United States, “as the guilty party for the current situation, should accept to retrace it steps back from the path it has travelled.” Second, to turn back from this path, the US should lift all sanctions imposed since its exit from the JCPOA in 2018, “all at once and in an effective manner.” Third, to provide a guarantee that no US government in future will repeat what former President Donald Trump did by withdrawing from the agreement.

As Tehran listed its new conditions, it got a boost of support on Friday from Russia and China, two signatories of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, or JCPOA.

Russia criticized the United States for threatening Iran with diplomatic escalation at the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in case Iran did not improve cooperation with the UN nuclear watchdog. On Thursday the US expressed deep disappointment at the failed trip of IAEA chief Rafael Grossi to Tehran on Tuesday, when Iran refused to fully cooperate with the nuclear watchdog.

Speaking at a joint news conference with Chinese ambassador Wang Qun, Russian ambassador Mikhail Ulyanov called the US threat to convene an extraordinary IAEA board meeting to censure Iran "not helpful" and "counterproductive".

"Our American counterparts lose patience. But I believe for all of us we need to control our emotions. Probably the US did not communicate with the Iranians for a very long time and forgot that Iranians don't do anything under pressure. If they are under pressure, they resist," Ulyanov told reporters.

His last comment was a sign of strong backing for Iran and if Russia follows this policy when the talks begin on Monday, a clear break will emerge between the West and Iran and its allies.

On Wednesday, IAEA director general Rafael Grossi admitted that the agency was unable to inspect the production of advanced centrifuges at the Karaj facility as it did not have cameras and other monitoring equipment installed at the site.

The continued refusal of the Islamic Republic to cooperate with the agency has prompted the U.S. and its European allies to threaten Iran with a special board meeting before the end of the year.

With reporting by AP

Speaking to state television Thursday, Saeed Khatibzadeh was reacting to reports that US officials had discussed with Israel a possible step-by-step approach to reviving Tehran’s 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.

“The position of the Islamic Republic has been clear for months and its new government without any hesitation has articulated its position,” Khatibzadeh said. “American sanctions should be lifted all at once, and their removal should be verifiable, together with objective guarantees.”

Recent reports in American media spoke of an interim agreement possibly suspending some sanctions, with waivers promising the US would not take action against third parties paying money owed to Iran, in return for some limitations on the Iranian nuclear program. There have also been reports that Israeli officials, who opposed the 2015 deal, dismissed the idea.

Focus on sanctions

Khatibzadeh resisted a question from state television framing the Vienna talks as between Iran and “the other party,” meaning the US. “We don’t have another party,” he said. “Iran is in negotiation with 4+1, and our focus is on ways to lift US sanctions.”

The “4+1” refers to the remaining parties to the 2015 deal, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), who are formally involved in talks with Iran in Vienna that resume on November 29: China, France, Germany, Russia, and the United Kingdom.

The JCPOA was in 2015 signed by Iran and the P5+1, the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council plus Germany, but the US, having voted for the JCPOA at the UNSC, then left the agreement in 2018 and imposed ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions.

In six rounds of talks in Vienna the US has taken part indirectly. Tehran has recently emphasized that Washington, which has been emphasizing its close consultation with Israel and the Gulf Arab states, is not formally in the diplomatic loop.

Mohammad Eslami, head of Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Thursday rejected US criticism that Iran did not fully cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). The US representative at the IAEA Thursday told the agency’s board of governors that if Iran did not allow the IAEA to repair its monitoring cameras at a nuclear installation in Karaj, west of Tehran, Washington would push for an extraordinary IAEA meeting before the end of the year.

‘Time was short’

Eslami argued Karaj access, which Iran restricted after a drone attack in June, was related to the JCPOA and that as the US, having left the JCPOA, should not meddle. Iran in February restricted its cooperation with the agency to broadly that required under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty (NPT).

Although it has a temporary agreement in place allowing the IAEA to service monitoring equipment in nuclear sites, Karaj, which was attacked by a drone in June, is a manufacturing plant and therefore not covered under NPT safeguards.

Eslami repeated Khatibzadeh’s earlier remarks that the focus in Vienna talks should not be on nuclear issues but on ensuring the US lifted sanctions. He insisted the IAEA chief Rafael Mariano Grossi had this week confirmed that the agency had not found evidence of Iran breaking its commitments.

In his trip to Tehran Monday, Grossi had tried to reach agreement with Iran over servicing monitoring equipment in Karaj – which Iran allowed under the JCPOA– and to gain what the agency regards as satisfactory answers over unexplained uranium traces found in three sites where work was carried out before 2003.

Eslami repeated a new argument that Iranian officials returned to on Friday, that the talks with Grossi had been “inconclusive” because “time was short.”

In a statement presented on the second day of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s board meeting, the US expressed deep disappointment that an eleventh-hour trip by Director General Rafael Grossi to Tehran, the Iranian government failed to resolve outstanding issues.

An extraordinary board meeting can result in censuring Iran; a step that can be a prelude to taking the case to the United Nations Security Council for more serious action against the Islamic Republic.

Iran has reduced it cooperation in allowing the IAEA to monitor its nuclear facilities since February, prompting the international watchdog to warn that it can no longer be certain what exactly transpires in these sensitive installations. Iran’s decision was part of its efforts to reduce commitments under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, JCPOA.

In September Iran allowed the IAEA to do maintenance work on its cameras, but later did not allow the replacement of damaged cameras at its Karaj manufacturing site where it produces uranium enrichment equipment.

“If Iran’s non-cooperation is not immediately remedied, including on the issues raised under the JCPOA agenda, especially the restoration of continuity of knowledge at Karaj, the Board will have no choice but to reconvene in extraordinary session before the end of this year in order to address the crisis,” the statement read by US Chargé d’Affaires Louis L. Bono said.

Multilateral nuclear talks with Iran to revive the JCPOA will resume on Monday and a negative IAEA board meeting can have an impact on these negotiations. The overall mood surrounding the talks is not very positive, as Iran has brought tougher demands to the table, asking US sanctions to be lifted before any new deal is reached.

Meanwhile, the spokesman of Iran's nuclear energy organizations, Behruz Kamalvandi, said Thursday that the Karaj facility does not fall under monitoring agreements with the IAEA. He also tried to soften the impact of Grossi's failed trip to Tehran by claiming that time was too short to reach an agreement.

Iran has also boosted uranium enrichment as it has reduced cooperation with the IAEA. Tehran is now producing 20-percent and 60-percent uranium, raising alarm that it could be months away from producing a nuclear weapon.

The United Kingdom, France and Germany in a joint statement on Wednesday warned that Iran has been escalating its nuclear program “systematically” for two years, “permanently and irreversibly upgrading its nuclear capabilities”.

The US also raised the issue of conditions under which IAEA inspectors work in Iran. Grossi in his reports has said that his staff undergo invasive searches during their work. The uS said it was “seriously alarmed” that “Agency inspectors continue to experience excessively invasive physical searches at the hands of Iranian security personnel, and that such treatment threatens to prevent Agency inspectors from effectively discharging their functions.”