Cairo: Hani Kamal El-Din
Tensions between Iran and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) have escalated recently, with Tehran showing clear signs of refusing cooperation on its nuclear program. This development follows a visit by IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi to Tehran, which failed to yield positive results. Member states of the IAEA Board of Governors are now considering introducing a new resolution condemning Iran.
According to reports from media outlets opposing the Iranian regime, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany are preparing to table a strongly worded draft resolution during the Board of Governors’ meetings. The draft accuses Iran of backtracking on its international commitments and concealing sensitive aspects of its nuclear program. Critics warn that Iran is nearing full nuclear capability, heightening international concerns.
Grossi’s Visit to Iran
From November 13 to 15, IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi visited Tehran to assess the progress of Iran’s nuclear program. His visit occurred against the backdrop of stalled negotiations over the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which began to unravel in 2018 following the U.S. withdrawal under former President Donald Trump.
During his visit, Grossi inspected declared nuclear facilities in Natanz and Fordow and held discussions with Iranian officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi, both of whom assumed office earlier this year. Despite these high-level meetings, the visit yielded no tangible progress in bridging the divide between Iran and the IAEA.
Hardened Positions
Reports indicate that Western countries plan to pressure Iran via the IAEA Board of Governors, urging Tehran to take meaningful steps to ensure transparency in its nuclear activities. However, Iran has warned of a proportional response to any resolution adopted against it. Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi recently stated, “If a resolution is passed against us, Iran will respond accordingly. We will take new steps in our nuclear program that they will not like.” Araqchi emphasized that Iran has historically responded to perceived hostile actions by the IAEA with escalations in its nuclear activities.
A similar episode occurred in June when the Board of Governors adopted a resolution condemning Iran. Despite U.S. reluctance to officially back the resolution for fear of provoking Tehran, the measure passed with support from 20 countries. In response, Iran installed advanced centrifuges at its Natanz and Fordow facilities, reiterating that its nuclear program remains peaceful.
Mixed Signals
Despite the ongoing standoff, Iran has sent positive signals throughout the year, expressing willingness to resume negotiations with Western countries. Both President Pezeshkian and other officials have signaled readiness to discuss reviving the JCPOA. Most recently, Araqchi announced that talks with European nations might restart soon, highlighting renewed interest in the deal.
However, the return of Donald Trump to the White House after the recent U.S. elections complicates the situation. Trump’s administration is expected to reinstate a “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, with reports suggesting that new sanctions will aim to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table. Yet, Iranian leaders have consistently declared that they will not engage in dialogue under external pressure, posing significant challenges for Trump’s strategy.
Western Concerns
Western powers insist that any renewed negotiations with Iran must include robust safeguards for its nuclear program, especially given lingering doubts about Tehran’s intentions. A German source critical of Iran’s nuclear activities stated, “Iran has failed to meet its obligations under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the JCPOA.”
The standoff between Iran and the IAEA remains a focal point in the nuclear dispute, with ongoing fears about the implications of further escalation for regional and global security. While diplomacy remains an option, its success will depend on significant compromises from all parties involved.
