World view

Iran and nuclear energy: Making things clear

by Prof. Dr. Türkkaya ATAÖV

Through the centuries, Iran has been a noteworthy country in many ways. It has had a vibrant history for more than 2,500 years, and the imprints of its impressive civilisation have constantly overflowed over its extensive frontiers. Other national attributes that command respect include a long experience in statesmanship, and a creative people that has given the world thinkers, writers and artists. The significance of this country has not diminished in our times. On the contrary, it protects its well-deserved position in the family of nations. From a Turkish angle, this country is also our neighbour, and we shall continue to share with it a future that relates to the well-being of our two peoples.

Iran’s oil wealth has been known since 1908. At present, it is attracting attention on account of its unique regime and its desire to develop nuclear energy. These issues, especially within the frame of reference of the exceptional qualities mentioned above, inevitably lead to some misunderstandings and debates, and a need for clarifications. The most engaging controversy centres around Iran’s nuclear policy and programme.

Nuclear disarmament

First of all, it is necessary to make clear distinctions between several facets of the issue. The non-proliferation of nuclear weapons is a legitimate expectation. On the other hand, one of the basic rights of a state is to develop atomic energy. Another point is that the nuclear weapons option is not in Iran’s defence doctrine.

There is no doubt that the use of nuclear energy has to be internationally controlled. Scientific ingenuity untempered by humanism has led us to fashion instruments of our own destruction. After the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1968, the non-nuclear states expected the nuclear weapon powers to undertake measures leading to nuclear disarmament. It is only through disarmament at this level that can one eliminate the division of nations into two categories, i.e., those with nuclear weapons and the rest.

Only nuclear disarmament will end that basic discrimination. After all, which country detonated the first atom bomb and which dropped it on a civilian target? And which country exploded the first hydrogen bomb? Hence, India and Pakistan developed their own capabilities. Peace is not the absence of war. What is needed is the disarmament of minds. 

How it began

Atomic energy may be used for peaceful purposes, to the immense advantage of a country and also of humanity. But it was not indispensable for the strong states. To possess such an additional source of power did not mean much to them. It would be to the disadvantage of a medium-sized or small state, however, if it were restricted or prevented from making use of atomic energy.

The powerful countries have not only nuclear bombs but also the means to deliver them to a selected target much faster than the speed of sound. They may be used within a few minutes and annihilate the target almost instantly. Large areas may be wiped out completely. Traditional weapons are useless against them. For the underdeveloped counties, atomic energy for peaceful purposes is far more important.

Iranian nuclear activities started when an American company (AMF) helped to establish an atomic centre at Tehran University. That was in 1968. Documentary evidence indicates that Iran cooperated with the NPT safeguards as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Statute, allowing the Agency to carry out inspections. Iran was the only member that at times voluntarily invited the inspectors to visit all sites at their discretion. It has also voluntarily implemented the Additional Protocol since late 2003m even before it was ratified. It is the only country to have done this before parliamentary approval.

Knowing that Iran’s rights and intentions have not been properly reflected to the public, I feel urged personally to put these and other facts in print in book form  Had Iran intended to concentrate on nuclear weapons, the most opportune time would have been in the immediate aftermath of the 1979 Revolution.

The inspection story

The Director General of the IAEA paid his first visit to Iran in 2000, where he was thoroughly informed of the country’s intentions. Invited again in 2003, he congratulated Iran on its achievements. Iran provided ample information on research and progress regarding enrichment activities, uranium conversions, plutonium separation, mining and milling, research reactor, and heavy water production. It went beyond its legal obligations and granted access even to military sites, sometimes providing access within less than two hours’ notice. For instance, the Agency was granted permission to visit the military-industrial complexes of Kolandouz in late 2003, Lavbisan-Shian in mid-2004 and Parchin in early 2005. The results did not reveal any involvement in the use of nuclear material. The vegetation and soil samples disclosed no such evidence.

On the other hand, some conclusions were reported before the completion of all technical investigation and appropriate sampling. Some decisions were premature. At times, the Agency admitted the mistakes of the inspectors. Members cannot be penalized for not adhering to their voluntary commitments.

The issue was politicized to some extent. A UN Conference on the Promotion of International Cooperation in Peaceful Uses of Nuclear Energy had been held as early as 1987. One should add that the Agency has verified Iran’s suspension of enrichment-related activities at specific sites.

In all fairness, one expects the UN to acknowledge two additional facts: one, that international law has been undermined under the false pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction (WMD); and two, that the potential nuclear threat in the area is Israel, the only non-party to the NPT in the Middle East.

(DIPLOMAT  -  December 2005  -  Ankara)