This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/31/world/middleeast/un-nuclear-iran-trump.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Contradicting Trump, U.N. Monitor Says Iran Complies With Nuclear Deal Contradicting Trump, U.N. Monitor Says Iran Complies With Nuclear Deal
(about 4 hours later)
Iran is adhering to the limits placed on its nuclear activities under the 2015 agreement with six world powers, the United Nations monitor said Thursday in a quarterly report that could further complicate President Trump’s vow to find the Iranians in violation of the accord. The world’s nuclear inspectors complicated President Trump’s effort to find Iran in violation of the two-year-old nuclear accord with the United States and five other world powers, declaring on Thursday that the latest inspections found no evidence that the country is breaching the agreement.
The quarterly report by the monitor, the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency, found that Iran’s stockpile and the purity of its uranium fuel were well within the allowed maximums. Iran’s supply of heavy water, used in reactors that can produce plutonium, another nuclear-weapons fuel, also was within the limits, the report stated. Mr. Trump has made no secret of his desire to scrap the agreement, even over the objections of many of his top national security officials. But the reports of the International Atomic Energy Agency make it harder to create an argument that Iran is in violation.
The findings, initially reported by news agencies in Vienna, were not necessarily unexpected. But they could make it more difficult politically for Mr. Trump to justify scrapping the agreement, which was negotiated under the Obama administration. Mr. Trump has repeatedly called the agreement one of the worst deals ever and a giveaway to Iran. The latest declaration by the I.A.E.A. came just a week after Mr. Trump had sent his ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki R. Haley, to Vienna to meet with the top agency officials, who are responsible for conducting the inspections and monitoring Iranian compliance.
The agreement, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or J.C.P.O.A., relaxed many economic sanctions on Iran in return for its verifiable pledge to engage in only peaceful nuclear activities, which included limits on fuel that could be used in atomic bombs. Ms. Haley was pressing the agency to be more aggressive, and some administration officials have argued that the I.A.E.A. should demand access to a series of Iranian military sites. But under the accord, the agency can only do so when there is a reasonable suspicion that Iran is conducting illicit nuclear-related activities at those sites.
So far, according the I.A.E.A. and American officials, the United States has not delivered a list of suspect locations.
Ms. Haley, who is rumored in Washington to be a leading candidate to become secretary of state if the incumbent, Rex W. Tillerson, steps down later this year or next, made no comment on Thursday on the report’s findings. But she issued a statement that suggested that the administration would push the inspections argument further, despite an Iranian declaration several days ago that its military sites are off-limits.
“If inspections of Iranian military sites are ‘merely a dream,’ as Iran says, then Iranian compliance with the J.C.P.O.A. is also a dream,” she said, using the initials for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, the formal name for the Iran deal.
Iran welcomed the latest report as vindication. The official Islamic Republic News Agency republished the report’s main findings and said they “may come as a surprise to the U.S. administration.”
In its quarterly report, the I.A.E.A. found that on the second anniversary of the deal, which was struck in Vienna by John Kerry, then the secretary of state, and his Iranian counterpart, Iran’s supply and enrichment level of uranium fuel were well within the allowed limits of the agreement. Iran’s supply of heavy water, used in reactors that can produce plutonium, another nuclear-weapons fuel, also was within the limits, the report stated.
Iran was required to dismantle the one reactor it was building that would be capable of producing large amounts of bomb-grade plutonium, and it poses no threat.
The findings, which were released to member states of the agency and quickly leaked, were hardly unexpected. And while they make it difficult politically for Mr. Trump to justify scrapping the agreement, which he has called a “terrible deal” that he would have negotiated more skillfully, it does not preclude his own finding that Iran is in violation.
In fact, Mr. Trump has several options to choose from.
One is to simply scrap the existing accord, declaring that while Iran is in compliance with the letter of the agreement, it has violated the “spirit’’ by continuing to test missiles, finance groups the United States considers terrorist organizations and operate in Syria and Iraq. The deal itself dealt only with Iran’s nuclear activities, but Mr. Trump has said that was not enough to contain what he has called a growing Iranian threat.
But the problems with that approach are several. It would free Iran up to produce as much enriched uranium or plutonium as it wishes, which is why Mr. Tillerson and his national security adviser, Lt. Gen. H. R. McMaster, have argued against withdrawal. Moreover, the action would ostracize the United States.
Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia, which also are parties to the agreement, have all expressed strong support for it and have warned that if Mr. Trump withdraws, the United States would be isolated on the issue.Britain, China, France, Germany and Russia, which also are parties to the agreement, have all expressed strong support for it and have warned that if Mr. Trump withdraws, the United States would be isolated on the issue.
Iran welcomed the latest report as vindication. The official Islamic Republic News Agency republished its main findings and said they “may come as a surprise to the U.S. administration.” Another option would be to declare that Iran was in noncompliance but to keep enforcing the accord in any case, according to some administration officials. That would avoid a vote in Congress over reimposing sanctions, and it would probably defuse, or at least delay, a break with allies.
Iran’s supply of low-enriched uranium as of Aug. 21 was 88.4 kilograms or 194.89 pounds, well below a 202.8 kilogram limit. The level of purity did not exceed the limit of 3.67 percent, suitable for civilian power needs but not for weapons. The heavy-water supply totaled 111 tons, below the 130-ton limit. A third option, administration officials say, is to set up what amounts to a test that Washington expects Iran to fail. That would involve providing intelligence information to the I.A.E.A that nuclear-related work — from enrichment to possible weapons research — is the basis for an inspection demand.
Under an American law, Mr. Trump is required to assess Iran’s adherence every 90 days, and he has reluctantly found Iran in compliance so far. But Mr. Trump also said he expected to find Iran in violation at the Americans’ next 90-day interval, in October. So far, officials say, no such specific information has been turned over.
Whether such a finding would be the catalyst for Mr. Trump to withdraw from the agreement is unclear. Many of his top aides have advised him to honor the accord. There are other ways to press for further inspections. David Albright and Olli Heinonen, both former I.A.E.A. inspectors who have been highly critical of Iran, argued in an article published Thursday that the I.A.E.A. could make better use of provisions in the accord that enable verification that dual-use equipment — which could be used for civilian or weapons work — is properly accounted for.
At the same time, Mr. Trump has increasingly accused Iran of human rights violations and support for terrorism, issues that were not part of the nuclear agreement. That could set up regular inspections at locations the agency is not now visiting, Mr. Albright and Mr. Heinonen said in the article, posted on the website of the Institute for Science and International Security, a Washington group founded by Mr. Albright.
Others however, saw ulterior motives in any attempt by the administration to push for more aggressive inspections.
Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, a Washington-based advocacy group, was critical of Ms. Haley for suggesting that Iran might be violating the deal — even though the United States had presented no evidence that Iran is hiding something nefarious.
“It not necessary for the I.A.E.A. to inspect at random military sites without good cause or to just test Iran’s cooperation,” Mr. Kimball said. “By insisting that the I.A.E.A. seek access to unspecified ‘military sites,’ perhaps as a pretext for accusing Iran of noncooperation, Ambassador Haley is undermining the ability of the agency to get Iranian cooperation and access to key sites when it counts.”
Under an American law, Mr. Trump is required to assess Iran’s adherence every 90 days, and he has reluctantly found Iran in compliance so far. But Mr. Trump also said he expected to find Iran in violation at the Americans’ next 90-day report, in October.
Mr. Trump has also accused Iran of flouting the United Nations Security Council resolution that put the agreement into effect, which calls on Iran not to test ballistic missiles. He has imposed new sanctions on Iran in response, which the Iranians have denounced as a violation of the nuclear agreement.Mr. Trump has also accused Iran of flouting the United Nations Security Council resolution that put the agreement into effect, which calls on Iran not to test ballistic missiles. He has imposed new sanctions on Iran in response, which the Iranians have denounced as a violation of the nuclear agreement.
The Trump administration also appears to be laying the basis to request more aggressive inspections in Iran by the International Atomic Energy Agency, including at highly restricted military sites, arguing that a verification provision of the nuclear accord allows them. Iranian officials appear to have ruled out such requests, calling them “merely a dream.”
The agency’s latest report was issued a week after Mr. Trump’s United Nations ambassador, Nikki R. Haley, met with the nuclear agency’s top officials in Vienna to express American concerns about their ability to verify Iran’s full compliance with the accord.
Ms. Haley made no comment Thursday on the report’s findings. But she issued a statement that suggested that the administration would push the inspections argument further.
“If inspections of Iranian military sites are ‘merely a dream,’ as Iran says, then Iranian compliance with the J.C.P.O.A. is also a dream,” she said.
Political analysts who once thought the accord would probably survive the Trump administration are less optimistic now.Political analysts who once thought the accord would probably survive the Trump administration are less optimistic now.
“The Trump administration simply doesn’t like this agreement,” said Cliff Kupchan, chairman of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy in Washington.“The Trump administration simply doesn’t like this agreement,” said Cliff Kupchan, chairman of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consultancy in Washington.
“It will continue to look for a way not to certify Iran’s compliance in coming months,” Mr. Kupchan said. “And it will probably seek I.A.E.A. inspection of Iran’s military facilities to an extent Iran deems intolerable. This deal is still in a lot of trouble.”“It will continue to look for a way not to certify Iran’s compliance in coming months,” Mr. Kupchan said. “And it will probably seek I.A.E.A. inspection of Iran’s military facilities to an extent Iran deems intolerable. This deal is still in a lot of trouble.”