Unprecedented Obfuscation

The editors of the Wall Street Journal quote from the IAEA’s report on Iran’s nuclear program:

The IAEA is the U.N. outfit that is supposed to monitor Iran’s compliance with the agreement, which requires Tehran to answer the agency’s questions on its past nuclear work in order to obtain sanctions relief. On Wednesday the agency produced its “final assessment”—the finality here having mostly to do with the U.N. nuclear watchdog giving up hope of ever getting straight answers.

Hence we learn that “Iran did not provide any clarification” regarding experiments the agency believes it conducted on testing components of nuclear components at its military facility at Parchin. “The information available to the Agency, including the results of the sampling analysis and the satellite imagery, does not support Iran’s statements on the purpose of the building,” says the report. “The Agency assesses that the extensive activities undertaken by Iran since February 2012 at the particular location of interest to the Agency seriously undermined the Agency’s ability to conduct effective verification.”

For those of you who support the agreement the Obama Administration negotiated with the leaders of Iran, does this influence your judgment of the deal and if not why not? Has Iran lived up to its obligations under the agreement? Does this suggest that it is more or less likely that Iran’s compliance with any monitoring regime will be adequate to ensure its veracity?

2 comments… add one
  • Ken Hoop Link

    Not sure it matters. Hans Blix and Scott Ritter both said Saddam had lived up to his agreement and the US attacked anyway.

  • steve Link

    Never quite figured out why this was important.


Leave a Comment