So there it is. The IAEA has censured Iran for the first time in four years over it's stalling, secretiveness and lack of tranparency regarding its nuclear program. They have in fact, caught Iran in an outright lie. Iran has claimed that construction on the Qom enrichment site began in 2007 but the IAEA has satellite evidence showing that it began much earlier, in 2002.
This new resolution demands that Iran immediately mothball the newly-revealed nuclear enrichment facility, which experts agree has not been built for civilian, peaceful purposes. It's been built to house approximately 3000 centrifuges designed to produce about a ton of enriched uranium a year.
....that would be enough for a nuclear warhead but too little for Iran's civilian reactors that have yet to come online, including the still unfinished plant at the southern port of Bushehr.
Iran faced rare international unity today when the governing board of the UN nuclear watchdog issued a formal demand that it immediately halt work on a secret uranium enrichment plant at the centre of concerns that the country is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
Russia and China lined up with the US, Britain, France and Germany to censure Iran in a vote by the board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), passing the first resolution against Iran in nearly four years by a 25-3 margin.
The IAEA vote could form the basis for a future binding resolution by the UN security council, which in turn could be used to impose sanctions.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/...
The censure also reflects dismay at Iran's apparent rejection of the deal which would send about 75% of its enriched uranium stockpile out of country.
The IAEA measure also signals diminishing tolerance over Iran's reluctance to embrace an IAEA-brokered compromise deal on its enriched uranium.
That plan calls for Iran to ship its low-enriched uranium to Russia where it would be further enriched for use in a nuclear power station. It would then be shipped to France where it would be packaged in nuclear fuel rods and then sent back to Iran.
IAEA Director-General Muhammad el-Baradei told reporters in Vienna before the vote that Iran has continued to make counteroffers rather than accepting the compromise deal.
"[Iran's] position -- conveyed to me orally a number of times -- is that they want a simultaneous swap between the fuel and their low-enriched uranium," el-Baradei said.
"They are ready to put this material under IAEA control in an island in the Persian Gulf -- [the Iranian island of] Kish -- under our control and custody. But that will not take the material out [of Iran.] The whole idea, as I explained to them, to diffuse the crisis is to take the material out [of Iran
http://www.rferl.org/...
That proposal has been rejected for obvious reasons:
A senior Obama administration official said that proposal had been rejected because leaving the nuclear material on Iranian territory would allow for the possibility that the Iranians could evict the international inspectors at any moment. That happened in North Korea in 2003, and within months the country had converted its fuel into the material for several nuclear weapons.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
ELBaredei, who steps down as IAEA head at the end of the month finally shows his exasperation at Iranian stonewalling.
The director general of the United Nations nuclear watchdog declared in unusually blunt language on Thursday that Iran had stonewalled investigators about evidence that the country had worked on nuclear weapons design, and that his efforts to reveal the truth had "effectively reached a dead end."
Addressing IAEA governors in Vienna, Mr El Baradei said his inspectors had made no progress on areas which needed to be clarified in order to verify the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear programme.
"It is now well over a year since the agency was last able to engage Iran in discussions about these outstanding issues," he said.
"We have effectively reached a dead end, unless Iran engages fully with us."
//
Dr. ElBaradei’s statement was a sharp departure in tone, and a tacit acknowledgment that his behind-the-scenes effort to broker a deal had collapsed.
http://www.nytimes.com/...
Are sanctions looming?
The latest criticism of Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is another sign that new sanctions could be on the way.
The IAEA resolution, censuring Iran's secret construction of another uranium enrichment plant, was supported by Russia and China.
This does not mean they will join in a new round of international measures against Iran. But it does mean that Iran cannot count on them for diplomatic support.
And it possibly indicates that Russia will not supply Iran with the S-300 anti-missile system that Iran has ordered. That would be a sanction in itself.
US President Barack Obama has indicated that he will assess the Iranian position by the end of the year.
If he goes for more sanctions, he will try to get Russia and China on board. If he cannot, he will act with fellow negotiators Britain, France and Germany, plus, he hopes, the whole EU and other players.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/...
moon