November 26, 2003
Atomic Agency Warns Iran for Secrecy on Nuclear Activities
By MARK LANDLER
IENNA, Nov. 24 — The International Atomic Energy Agency passed a much-debated resolution today that condemns Iran for covering up its nuclear program for nearly two decades.
But the resolution, which stopped short of urging action by the United Nations Security Council, sets the stage for a verification process that could be every bit as contentious as the talks here over the last week.
The resolution, drafted by Britain, France and Germany, warns that Iran would face unspecified action if the agency's inspectors uncover "further serious failures" in its disclosures about nuclear activities.
While the United States and Britain say further deception by Iran would trigger a referral to the Security Council, the wording in the resolution is vague. What constitutes a serious failure is also open to debate, though the agency said it planned to hold Iran to a strict standard.
"The board is sending a very serious and ominous message that failure in the future will not be tolerated," said Dr. Mohamed ElBaradei, the director general of the agency, after the measure was adopted by consensus. "Our work in the next few weeks will be very intensive."
Noting that the agency wanted to do that work without interference, Dr. ElBaradei said in an interview at his Vienna headquarters, "I would like to ask the member states to sit back and relax."
The United States is unlikely to take him up on his invitation. Having pushed unsuccessfully for a much stronger resolution, diplomats said Washington would track the inspections closely, and seize on any evidence of Iranian deception as a way to ratchet up the pressure on Tehran.
"There must be a very robust verification," said Kenneth C. Brill, the United States ambassador to the agency. "The international community rejects 18 years of Iran's denial, deceit and deception."
Privately, American officials say they expect further disclosures of hidden nuclear activity by Iran, pointing to unexplored areas in Iran's recently disclosed use of laser technology to enrich uranium.
Iran reacted calmly to the resolution, but said it was disappointed the text left out what it claimed was the most important conclusion of a recent agency report on Iran: that there is "no evidence" of a weapons program.
For the United States, which had called on the 35-member board to recommend Security Council action, the resolution capped a frustrating week in which Washington found itself again at odds with Germany and France, as well as with its usually stalwart ally, Britain.
In talks with his European counterparts over the weekend, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell was able to win a tougher condemnation of Iran. The resolution "strongly deplores Iran's past failures and breaches of its obligation" under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
Mr. Powell, however, could not persuade the foreign ministers — Jack Straw of Britain, Dominique de Villepin of France and Joschka Fischer of Germany — to include an explicit threat to go to the Security Council.
A senior European diplomat said Iran had put heavy pressure on the three countries to leave out such a warning.
The Europeans, he said, did not want to jeopardize the diplomatic overture they made in October to Iran's president, Mohammad Khatami, which resulted in a pledge by Iran to suspend its enrichment of uranium, which is critical in the manufacturing of nuclear weapons.
Britain, France and Germany contend that the best way to police Iran is to take advantage of its pledges to be more open and cooperative. Only Britain raised the threat of taking Iran to the Security Council.
The main beneficiary of the trans-Atlantic haggling appeared to be Dr. ElBaradei, who had appealed for a strongly worded resolution that nevertheless did not elevate the Iran dispute to the United Nations.
An Egyptian diplomat with a methodical manner, Dr. ElBaradei has often had tense relations with the Bush administration. Some Bush officials believe he was not aggressive enough in hunting down evidence of a weapons program in Iraq in the months before the war.
With no weapons of mass destruction having been uncovered so far, however, Dr. ElBaradei's cautious approach has been vindicated, in the opinion of some delegates here. He regularly invokes the Iraq example.
"Iraq has been a very sobering experience," he said. "Everybody is learning from that experience."
Among the lessons, Dr. ElBaradei said, is that people should not jump to the conclusion that having an atomic research program is proof that Iran is seeking a bomb. Another lesson is that "inspections take time," he said. "Even if you have 1,200 people and $1 billion, it can take over a year."
His reference is to the vast weapons search being conducted by coalition forces in Iraq. Dr. ElBaradei said he would send no more than 10 inspectors to Iran for the next phase of the verification process.
Another difference between Iran and Iraq, according to officials here, has been the quality of intelligence. The agency said it received little "actionable" intelligence about facilities in Iraq. In Iran's case, dissident groups and governments gave inspectors a wealth of leads.
When the inspectors return to Iran next week, they are expected to conduct a range of projects: interviewing Iranians who were involved in the nuclear program, taking environmental samples, and monitoring Iran's pledge to cease its uranium-enrichment activities.
As they scour the countryside, the question is: what would lead them to declare Iran in violation?
"A small piece of equipment would probably not be a serious failure," Dr. ElBaradei said. "A lab working on nuclear activities would."
nytimes.com |
