Major Breakthrough on the Iranian Nuclear Issue

Surprisingly, besides agreeing on further meetings before the end of the month, the "Geneva Talks 2" resulted yesterday in a significant step forward, namely the storage abroad of most low-enriched uranium (LEU) produced so far by the Iranian centrifuges. The Obama negotiating team had the foresight to ask Iran to do so at an early stage of the negotiations, thereby confirming both its willingness to engage Iran constructively and its determination to be tough on the essential aspects of the Iranian nuclear threat. The move was brilliant.

Why is this important? Because low-enriched uranium (some 4% enriched) is already a long way towards the weapon-relevant highly-enriched uranium (some 90%), much more than these two figures seem to indicate. In the physics of enrichment, it's like a pre-cooked cake, so well pre-cooked that a few minutes in the micro-oven suffices to bring it to the table. This has been called the "breakout scenario" -- getting enough pre-cooked uranium openly under the eyes of the International Atomic Energy Agency, before kicking the inspectors out of the country and rushing to produce highly-enriched uranium.

For the time being, this shipment to Russia of the stockpile of LEU eliminates the breakout risk. Some would argue that Iran would only send to Russia part of its LEU stockpile and keep hidden any past clandestine production of LEU. Not so easy. The IAEA would indeed detect such dissimulation, having kept track over time of the some 350 tonnes of raw uranium that Iran had purchased from Namibia in the seventies.
Why would Iran accept shipping their LEU abroad? Politically, it seems that they have decided to counter Western concern in the short term, without losing ownership of the material in the long-term. Iran would keep title to the LEU, but the material would be beyond Iranian reach. Formally, Iran would simply purchase from Russia fabricated reactor fuel bundles for their own reactors - first for the Tehran research reactor, later for power plants - making use of their own LEU. The LEU should of course be shipped immediately to the fabricator, and stored there until fuel manufacturing.

The Tehran research reactor was built in the sixties by an American company (General Atomics of San Diego), fuelled at the time with highly-enriched uranium. Yes highly-enriched, bomb-grade uranium! In 1993, the depleted original fuel was substituted with low-enriched uranium supplied by Argentina. This last batch of fuel would thus be replaced by Russian fuel at the end of 2010.

Having the low-enriched uranium shipped to Russia in the very near future is a major achievement for the Obama Administration, and a significant gesture of good will on the part of Iran. This arrangement plugs the uranium channel to nuclear weapons for several years. The other channel -- that of plutonium -- should also be taken care of rather sooner than later. The Iranians have made progress in the construction of an Isotope Production Facility at Arak using a "heavy water reactor", a reactor design that can produce good quality plutonium. To reduce international proliferation concerns, the core of the reactor should be replaced by a less proliferating "light‐water design". This change would not affect the value to Iran of a facility needed for isotope production and many peaceful applications of nuclear technology. Hopefully, this possibility should come soon on the agenda of the Geneva Talks.

Comments

[S1m0n]

Iran hasn't committed to send it's entire stockpile to russia, so what the IAEA thinks about the operation is of no consequence. Iran said they'd send 'some' uranium to be enriched. They will do that. As they keep saying, they have every right to a civilian nuclear program, and they mean to exercise that right. Demands to the contray from the US or Israel are entirely illegitimate.

[sixchair]

How do we know that all LEU is accounted for?

[joabear]

Obama should thank the Iranian people.

“Presumably the régime in Iran is being so forthcoming because it needs a win on the international stage to shore up its flagging legitimacy at home, in the wake of presidential elections widely viewed as fraudulent­...” If this is true, Juan, then while we lament the spectacular failure of the Bush/Cheney administration's ‘belligerent non-engagement’ foreign policy, and note the progress, apparent achieved by president Obama — we should rightly give credit to the courageous Iranian people, themselves for their sacrifice = this gift: making any semblance of détente between IRAN and US possible.

http://www.juancole.com/2009/10/obama-pwns-bush-cheney-on-iran-first.html#comments

[sixchair]

Agreed. The people of Iran (excluding the guard and Mullahs) are brave and dignified. It's been a long time since I was so inspired by a peoples' action and they will yet bring about their own emancipation.

[betrayed1]

The IEA is a joke. How many times has this toothless organization been fooled in the past? It is pathetic that France is now the only major country serious about the Iranian threat.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/7f6065fe-af81-11de-ba1c-00144feabdc0.html

[Arsenic]

Lets see, wasn't it Iraq in 2003? Oops, my bad. 2003 was when the Bush neocon cabal duped America that Iraq had a nuclear weapon program. And the IAEC, dead spot on accurate in their description of no bomb program. My, how much we forget in 6 years. You know, back when you were saying that Iraq could have the bomb in 18 months.

[HansB]

Yes, how many times has the IAEA been fooled? Please do tell us.

[Wake-up]

Bruno - Wake-up and smell the mushroom cloud!

This is a rogue state that's playing us like a fiddle as they have for the last 10+ years. Everything in about stalling and not opening up all of their facilities.

What's the motivation for Iran to drop this? There is none. At least with N. Korea, we know they wanted money.

The only answer I see (since Russia and China appear to be not willing to get on board) is a blockade and therefore a cut-off of refined gasoline. That will provoke the people in Iran tho throw-out these loons out once and for all. Regime change or bombs seem to be the future here...

[Freenation]

your moniker sums up your attitude, one regime who has 0 nukes is a threat and the other with 200+ nukes is a victim?

[mhusaini]

Wait, isn't there someone who already has nukes in the Middle East? Hint: it's currently the only occupying force in the Middle East. Get it? Their quest to steal more land should not even be threatened by a false fear. The world is so hypocritical! Israel and the US haven't even signed the NPT, what gives them the right to demand that it be enforced on other countries. There is no right or wrong here, simply self-interest.

[rocketman69]

When has Israel ever threatened another country?

[Shomali]

Could it be that Iran never intended developing nuclear weapons? In the 1970's shah of Iran had a strategy to develop nuclear technology where within 18 months they could break away if they felt threatened. By acquiring peaceful technologies any country will be and are in the same position (any european country, Japan, even singapore can develop deliverable nukes within months) That exact point is built into the NPT by allowing countries to opt out, if their national security is threatened.

Isn't it true even as late as 2006 Iran proposed to only spin 3000 centrifuges any fuel produced by them to be converted to reactor fuel rods immediately(even 3.5% not current 19.5%)? and purchase the rest of fuel and sign an additional addendum to the NPT that would make it impossible to leave NPT.
( http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/06/opinion/06zarif.html?scp=3&sq=Javad%20zarif&st=cse )

The attitude that pushing Iran around has anything to do with nukes is preposterous. It's about eliminating threat to Israel, mostly imagined. The neocons have been writing non-stop on this from 1997. Their first stop was Iraq, then Iran. They have gone so far as to proposing redrawing the map of middle east presenting it at a NATO meeting including breaking eastern part of Turkey for creation of a "Western Friendly" Kurdistan, prompting the Turks to walk out.
( http://kurdishamericanfriendship.com/turkey.html )

Let's focus on real rather than imaginary threats.

[sixchair]

Why do they keep tesing missiles?

[IntellectuallyHonest]

A gesture of good will that no doubt will be ignored by the neo-con cowards as the lead the world to the brink of destruction.

[098230984]

Yeah, it worked out pretty well for Clinton when he did a similar deal for the North Koreans. Clinton didn't give legitimacy to a repressive regime that undermined our interests around the word while continuing with their nuclear program in secret.

[Shomali]

North Koreans were ready to develop nukes in 1994, they were not a signatory to NPT. President Clinton agreed to provide the Koreans thru Japanese companies and Japanese and South Korean money development of a light water reactor and fuel oil while the reactor was to be built and come online. In return North Korea agreed to sign NPT and not develop nukes. When George Bush became president he stopped fuel oil delivery, called North Koreans evil, accused them of clandestine uranium enrichment to build nukes. The North Koreans left NPT used spent fuel rods ( Plutonium ) to develop nukes told George Bush come stop us. There was no uranium enrichment in North Korea, the reason North Korea has nukes is the bullying tactic Bush/Cheney used not the agreement Clinton reached. Get a grip on facts.

[joabear]

Buying nuke time
The details of the landmark meeting between the so called five plus one and representatives of the IRR, the Islamist Rapist republic, are sketchy. There are tidbits of information pointing to arriving at some sort of stopgap measure to temporarily lessen the sane world’s apprehension with IRR’s full cycle illegal nuke program.

Apparently IRR has accepted to have some of its stockpile of low-grade enriched uranium be transferred to Russia for further enrichment and then converted to useful fuel for Tehran nuclear research site by French technicians. In addition the IRR has promised to within the next two weeks allow the outgoing head of the IAEA and his inspection teams visit the newly revealed Qom nuke site. If all goes accordingly then there will be further meetings between the parties by the end of the current month. ...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091002/ap_on_re_eu/eu_iran_nuclear_talks_32


http://www.iranian.com/main/node/82706

[joabear]

NUCLEAR
Balance of deterrence, or a catastrophe?
Iran has no intention to limit or alter its nuclear program

by Tina Ehrami
02-Oct-2009

After several years of IAEA inspections, accusations of a clandestine production of nuclear arms, UN security council sanctions and even threats of preemptive strikes, Iran continues its nuclear program. The question remains whether the possibility of Iran joining the Middle East nuclear arms family would destabilize the region. Or would it stabilize the balance of deterrence and with that only empower Iran’s position without causing a security threat to Israel and the US interests in the region? This review essay focuses on these questions and provides a critical analysis on these issues>>>

http://www.iranian.com/main/2009/oct/balance-deterrence-or-catastrophe

[BiBiJan]

In the first meeting Iran offered to forego her nuclear breakout capacity. Wow! New York Times managed to insinuate that "If Iran has secret stockpiles of enriched uranium, however, the accomplishment would be hollow, a senior American official conceded". http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/world/middleeast/02nuke.html Well, the same NY Times was breathless about this same 1000 kilos of LEU when it was first reported on by IAEA. "The discrepancy came to light when the report noted that the new total came from the addition of 171 kilograms of new production to 839 kilograms of old production. But the agency had previously reported the old production as 630 kilograms. So the Iranians had actually made far more uranium than previously disclosed - 209 kilograms more, an increase of a third." http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/world/africa/20iht-nukes.1.20331042.html

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bruno-pellaud/major-breakthrough-on-the_b_307366.html

[Cautious]

I think this is testimony to how quickly and effectively BHO can get something like this done. He was "nice" when it was time to be diplomatic and open, he was tough when it was time to be tough, and this major issue got taken care of in a very short time when it presented itself. This is a major major foreign policy coup, and I don't think enough can be said about it.

Let's just hope our President is able to be this effective when it's apparent that the financial industry and the health care industry are not really interested in being "nice" about their issues as well.

Obama himself describes himself as a "ruthless pragmatist". Micheal Moore guesses that Obama uses the tactic of "faking right and going left" (basketball metaphor). I think we see that here. Obama started by using the "open hand" approach with Iran, and they didn't take it. In less than a week, we've gone from the Grand Ayatollah bloviating about keeping this enrichment site open to having the uranium sent to Russia.

Obama may seem all warm and fuzzy and Kumbaya to a lot of people, but I think we're seeing an example of what he can do when it's time to take a more direct approach.

Whatever anyone thinks about our POTUS, I sure as hell wouldn't play poker with him.

[BiBiJan]

While I appreciate your appreciation of Obama's abilities, you are mistaken to think Obama has exacted a capitulation from Iran. Iran regards people who advocate possessing nuclear weapons as "retarded". IAEA, and NIE see no waepon development. Iran sending LEU to Russia is simply a mature first response to Western fears -- don't fear that we are as retarded as the nuclear weapon states.

As for the inspection of the newly declared enrichment site, having IAEA inspect it is in fact the consequence of Iran declaring the site to IAEA (a week before it was "discovered"). Again showing that Iran is willing to "prove" it has nothing to hide just so long as questions are not idiotic.

[cheforacle]

Where did the commentor, Cautious, use the term "capitulation". He didn't. You did. No one expected Iran just to capitulate. What we have not seen in the past eight years was any progress at all. As a matter of fact, Iran sped up its nuclear program during Bush immeasurably. To see any progress this early in the Obama administration is a positive development but it is early in the process so let's not get carried away. That said, its a good step.

[betrayed1]

Poker? Don't you mean checkers?

[William50]

All agreements have two sides, if you have watched in the past the American side is usually money or trade. I am for opening trade with this closed country. The reason is the jobs will go to the young, they are now the majority of the population and with wealth comes power... it also enables them to communicate with a larger world .
Iran is not Arab. They are young and nationalistic in nature, they are proud of their past and want to be known as a leader in this part of the world. Opening trade, oil, manufacturing would upset the balance of power inside this country. Oil now being with held, may bring oil prices down and would, if the wealth was not used for the people upset the young Turks. Manufacturing would entail meeting with other business people, opening the eyes of those in management to a larger world, thus again making them upset with what their own government is doing.
If, and I do say if, the O'man has advisers that can think beyond the level of their belts we may see a small lessening in danger in the area. But you have to remember that this growth will take a decade, it will not lessen the arms to Palestine not the religious crack down that will start a revolution in Iran.
middleamerican2010
Casey

[BiBiJan]

Closed, backward? Where do you get this from?

See http://www.bibijon.org/iranimage/

[joabear]

Bibijan: Did you vote for Ahmadinejad??

[joabear]

bibijon: Are u Basiji affiliated?

[joabear]

Your site is a joke...

[Ergon]

Yeah and will we reciprocate by lifting sanctions? They can't even get airplane parts for their civilian airliners.

[OgreDaddy]

I'm cautiously optimistic hearing this.

It also really has quite a bit of impact to think where all this would be right now
if Sara Palin and The Guns For Jesus Evangelicals were in charge of foreign policy.

[dshwa]

Heaven forbid.