A nuclear expert has said Article IV of the NPT, which allows signatory countries to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, offers nations enough leeway to engage in weapon development in the absence of a comprehensive inspection mechanism and enforceable sanctions.
Highlighting the risks in the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), a nuclear expert has said Article IV of the NPT, which allows signatory countries to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes, offers nations enough leeway to engage in weapon development in the absence of a comprehensive inspection mechanism and enforceable sanctions.
Article X of the NPT allows members to withdraw from the treaty anytime, potentially allowing countries to withdraw from the pact and continue with nuclear weapons development, L V Krishnan, a nuclear expert, pointed out during a discussion on "Iranian deal and nuclear negotiations" at the Chennai Chapter of Observer Research Foundation on April 18, 2015.
Initiating the discussion, Mr Krishnan said the focus of the current negotiations is to limit and reduce Iran's capability to produce nuclear weapons. Iran being a signatory to NPT (non-proliferation treaty) is bound by the international statute to refrain from research and development of offensive nuclear technology. He said "The world's response to the rising arsenal of nuclear weaponry is not predicated on the insurmountable risk these warheads pose to humanity, but rather on the geopolitical interests of the rich and powerful nations. The global reticence towards the development of nuclear technology is calibrated and concentrated on specific nations that serve geostrategic interests."
Iran's persistent stand on its liberty to engage in nuclear research much to the consternation of the West and also Saudi Arabia took a major turn after Rouhani was elected president in 2013. Rouhani, who earlier served as the country's top negotiator with the EU-3, namely the UK, Germany and France, softened the country's stand on its nuclear technology. He has since declared that nuclear weapons were against the religion.
The global reaction to Iran's nuclear programme has been fuelled by several allegations of Iran being involved in nuclear warhead development, the recent one surfacing in 2011. The lack of transparency and the absence of a substantial reason for a nation placed high on oil reserves to engage in nuclear development have fuelled the suspicions among P5+1 nations, observed Mr Krishnan.
Repugnant to Islam
Chronicling Iran's engagement with nuclear technology, Mr Krishnan noted that the reversal of global public opinion on the country's nuclear programme started with the Revolution of 1979. It had been launched in the 1950's with the help of the US and was further supported by several Western European governments.
With the fall of Shah's Raza Pahalvi's pro-West regime in 1979, supreme leader Ayatollah Khomeini disbanded the nuclear weapons research programme, citing it was repugnant to Islamic tenets. Thereafter international cooperation was cut off and nuclear fuel supply was suspended. When Iran decided to continue and reinstate its nuclear development agenda in 1981, the West was highly suspicious and less obliging to support the nuclear research.
It has to be further noted that several other countries such as Sweden, South Africa, Iraq and Switzerland in the past have attempted to build nuclear weapons but have disbanded their efforts owing to persuasion or coercion (in the case of Iraq). While all these other countries (with the exception of Iraq) met with no significant resistance to their programmes, Iran has been handed a raw deal.
Iran's support to Lebanon in the 1982-84 Lebanon-Israel war, occurring in the backdrop of a religious revolution, served as the inflexion point in the nuclear relations between the west and Iran, observed Mr Krishnan. This geo-political move by Iran led to Israel classifying Iran as an existential threat and raised suspicions on its nuclear program.
Transparency aspect
Enumerating the causes for concern on the Iranian nuclear programme, Mr Krishnan said that apart for the transparency aspect, several other reasons have triggered suspicion. With no uranium source, Iran's drive to produce indigenous enriched uranium (LEU 20 percent) to fuel their reactors is possibly the biggest concern. Large uranium enrichment plants at Natanz, Fordow, Arak and Bushehr capable of producing fissile materials that could be used in nuclear warheads. Lastly, Iran demonstrated its capability to launch satellites in 2009, which is a prerequisite to develop ICBMs.
Speaking on the specifics of the recent nuclear negotiations, Mr. Krishnan elaborated on the components of the nuclear deal signed between Iran and P5+1. While the international community has respected Iran's liberty to engage in nuclear technology, they have however placed strict limits on its enrichment program. The limitations are further accompanied by frequent assessments and inspections to extend Iran's "breakout capability" - the time needed to produce enough fissile material to build a nuclear weapon.
Under the agreement, Iran will reduce its installed centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,000. All of the operational centrifuges will be of the first generation. It also allows for Iran to engage in R&D of advanced nuclear machines for a 10-year period, but these plans need to be submitted to IAEA. The HWR at Arak will be redesigned and monitored to ensure that the reactor does not possess the capability to produce weapons grade plutonium. Iran will not produce or house any fissile material and no other HWR (other than Arak) will be built for 15 years.
The Fordow enrichment facility, which is buried deep in the mountains and impregnable to air strikes will cease to be an enrichment facility and the site will be converted into a physics and medical isotope research centre. Iran's enrichment program will be allowed to produce LEU 5%, all its existing stockpile of LEU 20% will be destroyed in a phased manner.
Benefits from the pact
Detailing the benefits of the nuclear pact, Mr Krishnan commented that Iran will benefit heavily from the removal of various sanctions - 25 US, 6 UN and 5 EU sanctions. Further, Iran has struck a favourable compromise with the international community that allows for nuclear R&D and fuel production at the Arak HWR. Removal of multilateral sanctions will help the Iranian economy get back on track. India too shall benefit from the nuclear pact; with the removal of sanctions India will be able to import a larger proportion of sweet crude and export a wider mix of goods to Iran.
Concluding the discussion, Mr. Krishnan highlighted the risks in NPT. He focused on article IV of the NPT, which allows signatory countries to develop nuclear technology for peaceful purposes. This provision in the absence of a comprehensive inspection mechanism and enforceable sanctions offers nations enough leeway to engage in weapon development. Article X of the NPT allows for members to withdraw from the treaty anytime, potentially allowing countries to withdraw from the pact and continue with nuclear weapons development.
(This report is prepared by Deepak Vijayaraghavan, Chennai)
The views expressed above belong to the author(s). ORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.
PREV
