Iran & the US: The Missed Nuclear Deal (Slavin)

For me, Barbara Slavin's article in The Washington Note confirms my view of the uranium enrichment negotiations since June between Tehran, Washington, and other countries: 1) they were genuine, motivated by Iran's crisis of a shortage of 20-percent enriched uranium for its medical research reactor; 2) the primary obstacle to a deal was internal divisions in Washington Tehran.

But now the questions for March 2010: 1) Is there still a crisis in Tehran over uranium stock? (Yes) 2) Does this mean the regime wants to re-open discussions for a deal? (Probably, but  there are still internal manoeuvres to be made) 3) Will the US still be receptive? (Likely) 4) Does this mean "engagement" is back on? (Unknown):

The Latest from Iran (18 March): Uranium Distractions

A senior U.S. official Wednesday confirmed that the United States offered the first civilian nuclear cooperation with Iran in three decades under the terms of a deal that Iran walked away from last fall.



Daniel Poneman, Deputy Secretary of Energy, said that had Iran accepted the deal --- under which it would have shipped out two thirds of its stockpile of low-enriched uranium for further processing abroad --- the U.S. would have inspected a 40-year-old reactor in Tehran to see if it was operating safely.

"We would have been well disposed to be helpful," Poneman said at The Washington Institute for Near East Policy. "We were willing in support of IAEA efforts ... to help assure that the Tehran research reactor was safe."

Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency, Ali Ashgar Soltanieh, told reporters after the meetings with Poneman in October that "one of the aspects in addition to the fuel is the control instrumentation and safety equipment of the reactor" and that "we have been informed about the readiness of the United States in a technical project with the IAEA to cooperate in this respect."

A U.S. official said on background that the United States would examine the reactor, provided to Iran in the late 1960s when Lyndon Johnson was president and the Shah ruled Iran. However, Poneman's remark was the first on the record confirmation of this.

This deal sweetener was well received by those close to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and allowed him to cast the package in a positive light.

Iranians much prefer U.S. technology to Russian nuclear knowhow. Some Iranians suggested that U.S. assistance might extend to the Bushehr reactor if a deal could be struck on the LEU. Bushehr, which was begun by the Germans in the Shah's time, is now a "mess," one official told me, a "hodge-podge of technologies" that Iran is afraid to run because it might "blow up."

Ahmadinejad's numerous opponents within Iran's complex political hierarchy attacked the LEU deal as a sell-out -- in large part because he had undercut their efforts to reach a nuclear understanding with the United States in the past.

Poneman said Wednesday that the offer remained on the table. Beyond the U.S. examination of the reactor, Russia and France would further refine 1200 kilograms of Iran's low-enriched uranium and turn it into fuel rods for use in the research reactor, which produces medical isotopes for treatment of cancer and other ailments and is due to run out of fuel by the end of this year.

"It has not been formally withdrawn," Poneman said of the deal. However, he confided later that the U.S. is "not chasing Iran" and that the Iranians know who to call if they are interested in coming back to the table. Otherwise, the United States will keep moving down "the pressure track" to increase the cost to Iran of its nuclear defiance, he said.

UPDATED Iran: The Opposition's New PR Campaign in the US

UPDATE 14 March: We've put the pieces and think we have the story of what happened at the press conference. More to come....

Iran: The Opposition’s Campaign in the US — Sequel With Revelations and A Lesson

UPDATE 2255 GMT: A journalist at the press conference writes to assure us that the "former Karroubi aide" was NOT Ataollah Mohajerani. The journalist also says that the theme of the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad rift, which was the Tehran Bureau headline (but which we think is tangential in the political situation) was the big pitch of the aide both during the formal conference and afterwards in conversations.

All of this indicates that the attempted PR effort of the opposition has been rather botched, with almost no coverage and a failure to bring out the points that would resonate in the US such as the position on sanctions and the declared aims of the Green Movement.

UPDATE 0915 GMT: Barbara Slavin, one of Washington's top journalists, adds, "A top aide to Mehdi Karroubi...said [President] Obama should send Nowruz [Iranian New Year] greetings this year. However, he argued that the message should focus on human rights and commemorate the scores of Iranians --- such as Neda Agha Soltan --- who have been killed since June by plainclothes thugs, prison torturers, and government executioners."

More than four months after their last public-relations effort in the US, Iranian opposition leaders have made another move to influence American political circles. "A senior aide to opposition cleric Mehdi Karroubi" met journalists at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on Friday. The senior aide "worked with [Karroubi] for more than 25 years" but is now based outside Iran (while he is anonymous in the TB story, skilled Iran-watchers will identify him easily).

The headline claim in Tehran Bureau is that the aide revealed that "Iran's supreme leader has cooled his support for president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad". That, in fact, is not much of a story. The claim --- at least as reported in the article --- has no specific evidence but echoes a number of points (such as the incident over Ahmadinejad's close ally Esfandiar Rahim-Mashai) that we have noted since last summer.


What is far more significant is the strategy behind the assertion. Putting forth the vision of a Khamenei-Ahmadinejad rift tries to shift a US Government from an approach to Iran based solely on "engagement"; it may even accept that Washington can work with the Supreme Leader while boycotting the President.

Even more important, but tucked away in the TB story, is this assertion from the senior aide: "The end goal is to have transparent, free and fair elections....Once that happens, you can be certain the Iranian people will elect [a president] who will secure peaceful and friendly relations with the world."

Last October, when a close ally of Karroubi appeared at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, US journalists criticised the Green Movement's speaker for refusing to declare acceptance of Israel and renunciation of Iran's nuclear programme. In this article, no mention of the Israelis or the Bomb and thus no cause for a dismissal of the Greens.

Instead, the senior aide said that the Obama Administration's nuclear-first approach, at the expense of ignoring Iran's human rights violations, is "exactly what Ahmadinejad wants....If the U.S. reverses this approach and focuses on pressuring Iran for its human rights abuses...this is what the Iranian government fears most." he said.

And another point to notice:

Karroubi's aide recommended the use of "smart sanctions", targeted financial sanctions against members of the Revolutionary Guard. "For such sanctions to be truly 'smart', we need only to look at the multitude of companies set up in Dubai in the past 3-5 years," he said, hinting that much of import traffic to Iran from the UAE happened under the auspices of the Guards....

"As an Iranian, I'd hate to see our citizens suffer. But even if they are hurt in the short term, whatever shortens the life of this government is in the interests of the [Iranian] people."