Iran: A Freeze for Peace – From Confrontation to Compromise?

As JNV has noted in past Briefings, there are plenty of proposals on the table which could help to break the Iran logjam. This is a short note on the current state of play.

There are two live issues: the numbers of centrifuges Iran might operate for uranium enrichment, and the way in which Iran might be prepared to suspend centrifuge operation in order to reach a lasting resolution to the crisis.

The declared US objective is to have no operational centrifuges in Iran, and to get Iran to completely suspend enrichment as a precondition to any negotiations. (See Briefing 95: Designed To Be Refused for more details.) Most countries recognize that these are not reasonable goals, and that some form of compromise is going to be necessary.

Iran has indicated possible flexibility on these two issues. For example, ‘In July [2006], Sadegh Kharazzi, a former [Iranian] ambassador to Paris… told the FT the leadership was ready to negotiate a deal in which Iran limited enrichment inside the country to “some 100” centrifuges.’ (FT, 13 Sept. 2006, p. 9 – Briefing 96)

In Briefing 96, we pointed out that Iran was seeking pre-negotiations on exactly what ‘suspension’ would mean, while holding out the offer of up to two months’ suspension during negotiations.

Later, a proposal was put for mutual suspension – suspension of sanctions on Iran by the Security Council and suspension of uranium enrichment by Iran: ‘The IAEA chief, Mohamed El-Baradei, called at the weekend for a “timeout” in the worsening confrontation in an attempt to enable both sides to save face and climb down. But the Americans rejected the proposal.’ (Guardian, 31 Jan. 2007, p. 17 – Briefing 102)

Now the effort is to stop further deterioration of the situation – US allies are exploring the idea of a watered-down ‘time-out’. There would be no further Security Council sanctions, and in return Iran would hold off on expanding its enrichment programme. This is being called a ‘freeze for peace’. The US is reportedly ‘still very skittish’ on this possible fragmentation of its hard-line coalition. (http://tinyurl.com/246o5y)

Yesterday (Friday 22 June), the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Mohamed ElBaradei had a two-hour meeting in Vienna with Ali Larijani, Iran’s chief negotiator – representative of the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The meeting continued today (Saturday).

Two weeks ago, ElBaradei spoke out strongly against war: ‘The head of the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency said Thursday an attack on Iran over its refusal to freeze programs that could make nuclear weapons would be “an act of madness,” an indirect warning to the United States and Israel.’ (http://tinyurl.com/22g6zu)

ElBaradei said: ‘said any use of force to shut down Iran’s nuclear programme “would be catastrophic, it would be an act of madness, and it would not solve the issue”.’ (http://tinyurl.com/yqrqdd)