Iran has begun secret negotiations on proposals to surrender a substantial part of its uranium stockpile and suspend enriching nuclear fuel in return for an end to sanctions that have crippled the country’s economy.
By Praveen Swami, Diplomatic Editor
16 Dec 2010
The Turkish-led deal calls on Iran to ship about 1,000 kilograms of its low-enriched uranium, as well as its entire 30 kilogram stockpile of 20-per cent enriched uranium, to a safe location.
In return, France and Russia will supply ready-made fuel rods for the medical isotope reactor for which Iran says it has been enriching uranium to 20 per cent – a level which halves the time needed to manufacture weapons-grade material.
“We think the deal is doable,” an official involved in the negotiations said, “but there’s still a lot of detail to be worked through.” Turkish and Iranian negotiators, diplomatic sources say, have met several times to discuss the contours of the deal, which they hope to bring to the table next month at a meeting with an international consortium called the P5+1 – the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Germany.
France, Russia and the United States have also been involved in the negotiations, which began after a meeting between Ahmed Davutoglu, Turkey’s foreign minister, and Iranian officials in Bahrain earlier this month.
Earlier this month, talks between the P5+1 and Iran ended in impasse, after it refused to discuss specific nuclear issues. A French diplomat told The Daily Telegraph the discussions consisted of “a lot of monologues”.
Backed by P5 member China, as well as Brazil, Turkey has long argued against harsher sanctions on Iran, arguing that weakening its economy threatens regional stability.
“Turkey does not want to impose itself on the world stage,” said Mustafa Kibaroglu, a nuclear expert at Bilkent University in Ankara, “but it has real stakes here. Shallow, hectoring diplomacy is not going to do it. Iran needs an interlocutor it trusts.” In the US, opinion is divided on the Turkish-led initiative. Last month, several influential senators called on Barack Obama, the US president, to reject any deal until Iran dismantled its uranium enrichment infrastructure.
But Hillary Clinton, the US Secretary of State, recently said Iran could resume enrichment work “at some future date once they have demonstrated that they can do so in a responsible manner”.
“The basic dilemma,” a US diplomat said, “is this: should we pocket our winnings, and ship out whatever low-enriched uranium we can, or hold out for more in the hope sanctions will work?”
The fuel-swap idea dates back to June, 2009, when Iran asked the IAEA for permission to purchase fuel for its medical isotope reactor.
France, Russia and the US offered Iran ready-made fuel rods for the medical reactor in return for its 1,200 kilogram stockpile of low-enriched uranium – enough, if refined further, to manufacture one nuclear bomb.
Negotiations stalled on the question of whether it would ship out its low-enriched uranium stockpile before or after the fuel rods were delivered.
But in May this year, Turkey and Brazil signed a deal with Iran that envisioned that 1,200 kilograms of Iran’s low-enriched stockpile would be transferred to Ankara in return for fuel rods.
The US rejected the deal, noting that Iran had by then enriched even more uranium – defeating the point of the fuel-swap, in its view. Iran has, since then, produced a further 1,500 kilograms of low-enriched uranium, and enriched part of that even further.
“The real issue is not 1,200 kilograms of low-enriched uranium, or 2,000 kilograms of low-enriched uranium,” argues Dr Kibaroglu. ” The fuel swap is just a confidence building measure. But what is really needed is strategic security, through a grand bargain between the US and Iran which addresses all their problems.”