The West Must Be Afraid Of Plutonium In Iran - Ex-Nuclear Chief
Iran's former nuclear chief who is a member of parliament says the Islamic Republic should produce plutonium in addition to enriching uranium to 90 percent.
Iran's former nuclear chief who is a member of parliament says the Islamic Republic should produce plutonium in addition to enriching uranium to 90 percent.
Fereydoun Abbasi, a member of parliament’s energy committee, said Saturday that Iran should enrich uranium not just to 60 percent – the highest level reached at present – but to 90 percent and more. Uranium enriched to 90 percent is only used for producing nuclear bombs.
But what appeared to be a direct threat amid nuclear talks with the West was Abbasi’s statement that Iran should also produce plutonium.
“Western countries must be afraid of plutonium in Iran. We want plutonium for energy production, not weapons, and it must be available in the country,” he said, adding that “we must keep the enriched materials.” Abbasi went on to say that Iran must do these things publicly and under the supervision of the agency.
Indirect talks between the United States and Iran since April 2021 to revive the Obama-era Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) has reached a critical stage, as Iran has hardened its position in recent days and insists on its remaining demands.
Tehran is asking for US guarantees both for the durability of a new agreement and on issues related to sanctions. In addition, Tehran also is demanding an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) probe into its past undeclared activities to be closed.
Production of plutonium by Iran was banned outright under the JCPOA in 2015. According to the accord, a plutonium heavy water reactor that Tehran was building in Arak was dismantled and its core filled with concrete. Plutonium produced from uranium reactor spent fuel is the easiest path to making nuclear bombs.
Abbasi had earlier said that the highly enriched uranium fissile material should be used “both for scientific research and for making nuclear fuel for submarines.”
On September 1, another lawmaker and a commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard, Mohammad Esmail Kowsari said, "We can turn the 60% enrichment rate into 93%, which means an atomic bomb, and although we are not looking for this, we have the ability to do it if the other side is slow to move" to revive the landmark nuclear accord.
On July 17, Kamal Kharrazi, a senior adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said Iran has the technical capability to build a nuclear bomb.
Iran began in 2019 enriching uranium beyond the 3.67 percent cap set by the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), the year after the US left the 2015 deal and imposed ‘maximum pressure’ sanctions. There are no civilian uses for 90-percent-enriched uranium including research and medical isotopes which would need up to 20-percent enriched uranium. Iran also has no nuclear submarines and 90 percent is widely considered weapons grade fissile material.
In its nuclear brinksmanship since early 2021, Iran has also severely restricted monitoring by the IAEA by first denying real-time access and then disconnecting cameras and special equipment. In this period, it is believed Tehran has accumulated enough enriched uranium to easily take a leap to 90-percent enriched fissile material enough for one or two nuclear bombs.
A European diplomat told Iran International Friday there was nothing to add to Josep Borrell’s hope expressed Wednesday of reviving Iran nuclear deal in “coming days.” Borrell, the EU foreign policy chief, had said after a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Prague that near-17 months of talks had led to “common ground” and the basis for “an agreement that takes into account…everyone’s concerns.”
Since then, however, US State Department spokesperson Vedant Patel said late Thursday that Iran’s latest input, made Thursday, was “not constructive.” Politico cited a “senior Biden administration official” saying: “Based on their answer, we appear to be moving backwards.”
The latest stage in the 17-month effort to revive the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), has essentially become a US-Iran, EU-mediate, indirect dialogue based on the EU text circulated August 8. Iran responded August 15, and then the US August 24. Iran’s latest input, sent as usual through EU mediators, was Friday described as “constructive” and “aimed at finalizing the negotiations” by Foreign Ministry spokesman Nasser Kanaani.
The Iranian website KhabarOnline has a piece based on a recent Clubhouse discussion in which Hasan Behestipour, political analyst at the Institute for Iran-Eurasia Studies (IRAS), called the current process “ping pong diplomacy.” While Behestipour acknowledged that in an ongoing diplomacy, “it is not possible to discuss the details,” he suggested that “media management” could be better.
‘People are waiting to know how long this takes’
“Whether we like it or not, these talks and negotiations have affected people’s lives [in Iran],” Behestipour said. “If America has given an answer, people are interested to know what the answer of America is generally about…People are waiting to know how long this process will take…I think that the evidence shows that both Iran and America need an agreement and both are trying to reach an agreement with maximum points.”
The weeks of ‘ping pong’ has given space for a wide airing of views, including from those wary of compromise. Mehdi Sa’adati, a hardliner parliamentary deputy who was a high-ranking IRGC commander for many years, quoted in the official news agency IRNA, argued Iranian negotiators needed to stand firm on verifying the lifting of US sanctions, ‘guarantees’ over Washington’s commitment to a renewed agreement, and clarity that any US sanctions against Iran’s Revolutionary Guards would not affect “other economic areas.”
Sa’adati also demanded the removal of the “safeguards issue,” an apparent reference to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) probe into mysterious uranium traces found in Iran and linked to pre-2003 work. This is line with public statements by Iranian officials, including President Ebrahim Raisi, that the IAEA enquiry should end before the JCPOA is revived.
But Sa’adati rejected the idea these issues might be dealt with “later,” insisting they had to be “clarified in these talks.” This put him at odds with a raft of recent reports suggesting the Iran-US talks were looking at a stage-by-stage return to the JCPOA, with the IAEA probe dealt with perhaps 120 days after the initial agreement to restore the JCPOA.
‘A much longer stick’
Sa’adati also criticized the IAEA director-general Rafael Mariano Grossi for his June visit to Israel, which holds nuclear weapons clandestinely and has refused to sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation treaty. Iran has charged that the IAEA probe into Iran’s pre-2003 activities was closed in 2015 and then revived only after Israeli allegations.
In Israel, Ram Ben-Barak, head of the parliament’s foreign affairs and defense committee, told the 102 FM radio station that “a much better deal” was needed with “a much longer stick.” Ben-Barak, former deputy director of the Mossad extraterritorial force, emphasized the importance of the IAEA probe to get “honest and real answers about what they did there,” but also referred to an option of military force to end Iran’s nuclear program.
“What Israel wants is something better in place of this deal,” he said. “Something better means telling the Iranians ‘Listen, you will not have a nuclear program’.”