UN referral aimed at creating crisis: Diplomat’s comment on IAEA move
By Michael Adler
VIENNA: An escalation in the Iranian nuclear crisis is certain now that the issue is before the UN Security Council, diplomats in Vienna said on Thursday. “This will escalate the situation. It was meant to produce a crisis. Why else would it go to New York (where the Security Council is)? That’s the purpose of it,” a European diplomat affiliated to the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency said.
The IAEA had on Wednesday sent an assessment report on Iran’s program, to the council. Unlike the IAEA, the council has the authority to impose punitive measures such as sanctions.
This prompted Iran to threaten the United States with ‘harm and pain’ for leading the charge.
US ambassador to the IAEA Gregory Schulte said however that the move was intended to reinforce diplomacy, not to whet confrontation.
Mr Schulte said on Thursday: “Clearly the international community has not been able to resolve this issue solely within the International Atomic Energy Agency.”
He noted that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei, the author of the report, had ‘spoken about the UN Security Council lending its weight to IAEA efforts’.
“This is not the end of diplomacy. This is the next phase of diplomacy,” Mr Schulte insisted.
“The United States has been pushing for referral to the Security Council for quite awhile, not knowing what its post-referral strategy is,” said the European diplomat.
“If they have one, I doubt it. It’s a gamble, raising the stakes without knowing what to do,” he said.
The stakes seemed to be rising immediately.
Iranian security official Javad Vaidi, who led the Iranian delegation in Vienna, said after the end of the IAEA meeting: “The United States may have the power to cause harm and pain but it is also susceptible to harm and pain.
“So if the United States wishes to choose that path, let the ball roll,” Mr Vaidi said.
In Tehran, Iran’s supreme leader vowed not to halt the country’s nuclear drive.
“Today, the Iranian people and the officials of the Islamic republic of Iran, more powerful than before and like steel, will stand against any pressure or conspiracy,” a defiant Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said.
Diplomats said the Iranian crisis could be going down the same route as North Korea, which reduced cooperation with the IAEA and cut links completely in 2003 by withdrawing from the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).
Others said they hoped the parallel would not be to Iraq, where escalation led to invasion.
Non-proliferation analyst Mark Fitzpatrick, who is a former US State Department official, said in London: “There may be no end strategy but at least there is a strategy for affecting Iran’s cost-benefit analysis. For the first time, Iran will likely face real costs.”
“As long as this issue remained in Vienna, Iran could have its cake and eat it too,” Mr Fitzpatrick said, referring to Iran’s seeking to continue negotiations even while it defied the IAEA by enriching uranium.
Now, as Mr Schulte said on Wednesday: “Iran will face consequences if it does not meet its obligations.”
The approach is to be ‘considered and incremental’, Mr Schulte said, with the first step being ‘a call for Iran to cooperate with the agency’.
If this does not work, the sanctions which follow could come in stages.
“Iran will likely face increased isolation through sanctions that could restrict the travel of its officials and of various Iranian organisations,” Mr Fitzpatrick said.
“It could face legal sanctions restricting its participation in international organisations and events,” Mr Fitzpatrick said.
“This may or may not work but it’s not been tried before, so it’s worth the effort,” Mr Fitzpatrick said, adding that Washington wanted to avoid military action as it was ‘well aware of the consequences’.
