TEHRAN(Bazaar) –Marc Finaud, Head of Arms Proliferation at the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP), says even if deferral to the Security Council was voted by the Board of Governors, it is unlikely that new sanctions against Iran would be adopted by the Security Council because most probably Russia and China, who voted against the recent Board of Governors resolution, would veto them.
He adds that “It is unlikely that the Security Council would agree to new sanctions.”
Following is the full text of interview:
Q: The Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency approved an anti-Iranian resolution. The resolution calls on Iran to immediately cooperate with the IAEA's investigation into uranium particles found in three undeclared locations in Iran. What is your assessment of the tone of this resolution?
A: It is somewhat more demanding compared to the previous resolution adopted last June. It now considers the solution “essential and urgent”. The reason is the lack of progress since June in solving this issue in a satisfactory manner for both the Agency and Iran.
Q: Before the approval of the anti-Iranian resolution in the IAEA Board of Governors, the representative of the United States said: “Iran should cooperate with the IAEA and should understand that if it is not able to provide the necessary cooperation to resolve these issues, this council is ready to appeal to further measures, including the measures under clause XII.C of the Agency's Statute.” Based on this paragraph, the conditions related to referring the case to the UN Security Council have been described. How likely is it to implement this clause at the present time?
A: This referral would need solid evidence that Iran breached its obligations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement with the IAEA and, to some extent, the Additional Protocol although Iran implements it unilaterally without having ratified it. In any case, even if deferral to the Security Council was voted by the Board of Governors, it is unlikely that new sanctions against Iran would be adopted by the Security Council because most probably Russia and China, who voted against the recent Board of Governors resolution, would veto them.
Q: Other than this path (clause XII.C), western countries can also take Iran's case to the Security Council by activating the “snapback” mechanism. When will they go to this mechanism?
A: This 'snapback of sanctions is an option within the JCPOA if some parties consider that Iran has violated its JCPOA obligations. Here again, it is unlikely that the Security Council would agree to new sanctions. In any case, it is not in the interest of Western countries to create a linkage between the Safeguards Agreement and the JCPOA, because this is precisely what they accuse Iran of doing.
Q: It seems that there are still hopes for the revival of the JCPOA and the parties are using their pressure tools. The agency's resolution can also be evaluated in the same direction. What is your assessment?
A: Yes, of course, each 'side' uses its own means of pressure: Iran, by suspending its implementation of the JCPOA and linking revival of the JCPOA to the closure of the IAEA investigations; Western countries by resorting the IAEA Board of Governors resolutions. But the only possible solution is to accept the compromise draft for the revival of the JCPOA proposed by the European Union and solve the Safeguards issue bilaterally between Iran and the Agency as this was done previously.
Q: Considering the current situation, do you think the JCPOA will be revived?
A: The new geopolitical context, with the war in Ukraine, the new protest-related sanctions against Iran, and the loss of control of the House of Representatives by the Biden administration, constitutes a new obstacle that will probably delay any rapid solution, confirming that earlier opportunities for the revival have been lost.
نظر شما