Skip to main content

ElBaradei Brews Tea: The IAEA on Iran

Iran_nuclear_plant The International Atomic Energy Agency has been in the news a fair amount lately, especially as it tries to stake out a position vis a vis Iran before the Obama administration really turns it sights eastward:

Mohamed ElBaradei, director-general of the Vienna-based U.N. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said that after stockpiling enriched uranium, Iran would face further technical and political hurdles should it seek to build nuclear arms.

"There is a concern, but don't hype the concern," ElBaradei, alluding mainly to U.S. and Israeli warnings, said in a CNN interview broadcast late Sunday. "There is ample time to engage (Iran) and reverse the concern and to move into more engagement rather than more isolation."

While ElBaradei is perhaps a little over-sanguine in his gentle assessment of Iran’s ambitions, he’s not a fool about it, at least not precisely, though his pronouncements are very cautious:

In an interview with the Washington Post, ElBaradei said Iran had seen that the ability to build an atom bomb in a short period would give it an insurance policy against attack.

"Obviously, they look for their own security, and they have seen that if you have nuclear weapons, or at least the technology, you are somehow protected from an attack," he told the Post's Sunday edition.

“Somehow protected from an attack.” Let’s allow that the IAEA has its priorities – as a United Nations agency, it has to tread around the sensitivities of its members, of which Iran is one, to achieve its goals of inspection and cooperation – and further recognize that this rather weak tea from ElBaradei is made from very strong leaves – leaves that could upset important stomachs.

How does Iran see this? Here’s the lede on the Tehran Times’ story:

The UN nuclear watchdog chief urged the Obama administration on Thursday to open ""direct dialogue at a high level"" with Iran with “no preconditions” on its nuclear program.

We’re not a big fan of the word “preconditions,” heretofore known as “conditions,” and we’re sure Iranians know that their nuclear plans will be part of any discussion with the United States – Topic A, even – but a recognition seems to growing that the saber rattling that has characterized American-Iranian relations over the past several years will morph into something other, perhaps something that stands to make Iran seem less beleaguered and thus less attractive to its part of the world. (Not that it’s been all that attractive: at least some of the recent Arab interest in nuclear energy seems motivated by sidewise discomfort with Tehran.)

A story that will become much larger in the next couple of years.

Under construction: the nuclear plant in Bushehr.

Comments

Rod Adams said…
It is hard to look critically at world events in the past half century and not come away with the conclusion that owning nuclear knowledge gives a nation a certain amount of security from attack. Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, China, Russia, France, the UK, and the US have all developed their nuclear expertise partially as a result of a desire for national security.

Anyone who has studied middle eastern politics and history knows that there has been a contentious relationship between the Persians and the Arabs for many centuries. In the oil age, a major component of that conflict has been the battle over market share in the oil industry with Iran's oil being used as a wedge against Saudi oil by both the US and the UK.

Nuclear energy research and development is also scary for some people because it plays a role in energy industry competition, not just because there is a remote risk of nuclear warfare. If a nation has all of the components required for a complete nuclear power industry, it has a much greater ability to prosper and to act independently.

For those who spread rumors about Iran's uranium resources, use a little logic. It is a large and mountainous country with a lot of desert regions. It has a town named Ramsar that has some of the highest natural background radiation exposures in the world. Those facts indicate to me that the country has access to plenty of uranium within its own borders.

Please understand that I am no apologist for the way that Iran treats women or for the way that acts in certain countries. I also do not like many of its friends. However, some of those factors are even worse in countries like Saudi Arabia, yet we do not seem to have an issue with them there.

Popular posts from this blog

An Ohio School Board Is Working to Save Nuclear Plants

Ohio faces a decision soon about its two nuclear reactors, Davis-Besse and Perry, and on Wednesday, neighbors of one of those plants issued a cry for help. The reactors’ problem is that the price of electricity they sell on the high-voltage grid is depressed, mostly because of a surplus of natural gas. And the reactors do not get any revenue for the other benefits they provide. Some of those benefits are regional – emissions-free electricity, reliability with months of fuel on-site, and diversity in case of problems or price spikes with gas or coal, state and federal payroll taxes, and national economic stimulus as the plants buy fuel, supplies and services. Some of the benefits are highly localized, including employment and property taxes. One locality is already feeling the pinch: Oak Harbor on Lake Erie, home to Davis-Besse. The town has a middle school in a building that is 106 years old, and an elementary school from the 1950s, and on May 2 was scheduled to have a referendu

Why Ex-Im Bank Board Nominations Will Turn the Page on a Dysfunctional Chapter in Washington

In our present era of political discord, could Washington agree to support an agency that creates thousands of American jobs by enabling U.S. companies of all sizes to compete in foreign markets? What if that agency generated nearly billions of dollars more in revenue than the cost of its operations and returned that money – $7 billion over the past two decades – to U.S. taxpayers? In fact, that agency, the Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), was reauthorized by a large majority of Congress in 2015. To be sure, the matter was not without controversy. A bipartisan House coalition resorted to a rarely-used parliamentary maneuver in order to force a vote. But when Congress voted, Ex-Im Bank won a supermajority in the House and a large majority in the Senate. For almost two years, however, Ex-Im Bank has been unable to function fully because a single Senate committee chairman prevented the confirmation of nominees to its Board of Directors. Without a quorum

NEI Praises Connecticut Action in Support of Nuclear Energy

Earlier this week, Connecticut Gov. Dannel P. Malloy signed SB-1501 into law, legislation that puts nuclear energy on an equal footing with other non-emitting sources of energy in the state’s electricity marketplace. “Gov. Malloy and the state legislature deserve praise for their decision to support Dominion’s Millstone Power Station and the 1,500 Connecticut residents who work there," said NEI President and CEO Maria Korsnick. "By opening the door to Millstone having equal access to auctions open to other non-emitting sources of electricity, the state will help preserve $1.5 billion in economic activity, grid resiliency and reliability, and clean air that all residents of the state can enjoy," Korsnick said. Millstone Power Station Korsnick continued, "Connecticut is the third state to re-balance its electricity marketplace, joining New York and Illinois, which took their own legislative paths to preserving nuclear power plants in 2016. Now attention should