Direct threat against the non-proliferation regime

The situation around Iran’s nuclear programme is in one of the most critical stages/ situation not only from iran’s side but also for international peace and security and credibility of international organizations and institutions including UN and consequently NPT regime. Positions, speeches and   of the president of USA and its representatives, for example Marco Rubio, secretary of state of USA and other responsible peoples in governing body of US against Iran’s nuclear programme and its inalienable right to develop research, production and use of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes is a real and prompt threat against stability and credibility of the NPT. here i will elaborate and discuss the matter, based on and recalling the text of Non-proliferation of nuclear weapons treaty (NPT), the treaty that for decades is considered as cornerstone and heart of non-proliferation regime.

The preamp of the NPT inter alia says” Parties to the Treaty”,

…Expressing their support for research, development and other efforts to further the application, within the framework of the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards system, of the principle of safeguarding effectively the flow of source and special fissionable materials by use of instruments and other techniques at certain strategic points,

Affirming the principle that the benefits of peaceful applications of nuclear technology, including any technological by-products which may be derived by nuclear-weapon States from the development of nuclear explosive devices, should be available for peaceful purposes to all Parties to the Treaty, whether nuclear-weapon or non-nuclear-weapon States,

Convinced that, in furtherance of this principle, all Parties to the Treaty are entitled to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to, the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes,

Now compare Positions of the current and the previous officials of USA government with mentioned paragraphs of the preamp, the NPT says about “support for research, development and other efforts to further the application”, but as all we remember their desired intention which are said crystal clarity in their positions in different events and conversations which are disseminated widely, the modest and minimum intention is “destroying iran’s nuclear program” or prevention its progressive development. All their positions are in direct non-compliance with the text of the NPT. But this is not only in the speeches, these positions are reflected in their laws and official orders and specially are applied through unilateral sanctions not only against Iran but also against any country that wishes to have normal relationship with Iran. Sanctions that targeted not only almost all Iran’s industry but also and in an unfortune way against innocent people’s -including patients and kids. USA actions against Iran and Iranian people started before the critical stages and this is another argument that shows inconsistency  of USA’s international behavior with the UN charter and NPT  which are all considers “good faith” of parties. Threatening other states and applying secondary sanctions against them and unlawful expansion of USA national Law to international relationship is another action of the previous and current government of USA against international institutions and in this case NPT, which as mentioned before in envisages /invites state parties to ” to participate in the fullest possible exchange of scientific information for, and to contribute alone or in co-operation with other States to  the further development of the applications of atomic energy for peaceful purposes “.

Direct threat / direct shooting to / against the non proliferation regime (page 2)

Now returning to the NPT text. Article 3 setforts conditions for non-nuclear weapon states for benefitting nuclear energy. We read this article of the NPT together:

Article III

1. Each non-nuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty undertakes to accept safeguards, as set forth in an agreement to be negotiated and concluded with the International Atomic Energy Agency in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Agency’s safeguards system, for the exclusive purpose of verification of the fulfilment of its obligations assumed under this Treaty with a view to preventing diversion of nuclear energy from peaceful uses to nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. Procedures for the safeguards required by this Article shall be followed with respect to source or special fissionable material whether it is being produced, processed or used in any principal nuclear facility or is outside any such facility. The safeguards required by this Article shall be applied on all source or special fissionable material in all peaceful nuclear activities within the territory of such State, under its jurisdiction, or carried out under its c ontrol anywhere.
2. Each State Party to the Treaty undertakes not to provide: (a) source or special fissionable material, or (b) equipment or material especially designed or prepared for the processing, use or production of special fissionable material, to any non-nuclear-weapon State for peaceful purposes, unless the source or special fissionable material shall be subject to the safeguards required by this Article.
3. The safeguards required by this Article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with Article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the Treaty.
4. Non-nuclear-weapon States Party to the Treaty shall conclude agreements with the International Atomic Energy Agency to meet the requirements of this Article either individually or together with other States in accordance with the Statute of the International Atomic Energy Agency. Negotiation of such agreements shall commence within 180 days from the original entry into force of this Treaty. For States depositing their instruments of ratification or accession after the 180-day period, negotiation of such agreements shall commence not later than the date of such deposit. Such agreements shall enter into force not later than eighteen months after the date of initiation of negotiations.

   Iran joined NPT as a non-nuclear weapon state in 1972 and conclude and implement Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA) based on INFCIRC/153 since then. Its nuclear programme fall under fabricated challenge-fabricated because there were nothing showing noncompliance of Iran with its international obligations and safeguards agreement- since 2000 decade. after that in order to resolve problems raised by some countries in IAEA Board of governors, to show transparency of nuclear programme of Iran, to restore trust between Iran agency and international community which was damaged and in compliance with the concept of “good Faith in its international relationships and NPT,  Iran actively participated in international negotiations, the first attempts were not successful and  unfortunately without any positive result while really there was not any real fact against Iran, the country fell under Un security council resolution and UN sanctions. most of claims were based on fictious stories produced and disseminated by third parties or open sources. The second round of negotiations was more successful and become finalized in 2015 and JCPOA.

during this period west countries and specially USA tried to use any possibility, including unilateral sanctions, intelligent services to disrupt or stop Iran’s programme and becoming silent, or even encouraging position, against assassination of innocent people and nuclear related scientists and experts. All of which were and are in non-conformity with their international obligation under NPT and UN charter.

 Why i am saying their actions are against text and spirit of international law and NPT?

Any country is free to select its own technology and development strategy for sustainable development of the country and in achieving national development goals. Nuclear energy is considered as a key factor in sustainable development not only from providing energy needs but also for many other fields of real life of people. Iran include it in its development programme as a tool and to discharge its inalienable right to benefit nuclear energy as stipulated in article 4.

paragraph 3 of article 3 of NPT says” The safeguards required by this Article shall be implemented in a manner designed to comply with Article IV of this Treaty, and to avoid hampering the economic or technological development of the Parties or international co-operation in the field of peaceful nuclear activities, including the international exchange of nuclear material and equipment for the processing, use or production of nuclear material for peaceful purposes in accordance with the provisions of this Article and the principle of safeguarding set forth in the Preamble of the Treaty.”

it means that IAEA safeguards shall be considered together with article 4 and to comply it. It also says that safeguards shall be applied in such a way to avoid hampering economic or technological development of the state party or international cooperation. it means that any attempts of state party to peaceful use of nuclear energy or benefit from it, based on its technology development strategy shall to be considered and respected and followed by IAEA in safeguards implementation in that country. In real world for example, if any state decides to use one specific fuel cycle including enriched uranium or two stage fuel cycle using thermal and then fast reactor, safeguards shall to be designed to comply with this decision. Safeguards shall to be based on real and on-the -ground facts, and not based on “guess” and “reading intention of the state party”. We see that IAEA behavior originated by the wishes of the western countries specially USA is based of ” reading Iran’s intention” and not real world. This behavior undermines not only credibility of IAEA safeguards, but also NPT and its pillars.

After concluding JCPOA in spite of Iran’s efforts to comply with and implement its commitments under JCPOA and UNSCR 2231, commitments which in my  opinion are ultra its safeguards agreement and article 3 of NPT, the western side of the JCPOA failed to discharge their duty and responsibilities to prepare the situation for Iran to “benefit” from the JCPOA and more important to fulfill their responsibility under articles 3 and 4 of NPT as explained. all reports of Director General of IAEA about  implementation of JCPOA in light of 2231 UNSCR to the Board of Governors of IAEA for this period are crystal witness of good-faith implementation of JCPOA by Iran.

continuation of implementing all commitments under JCPOA by Iran for more than one year after unilateral withdrawal of USA and in spite of passive reaction of western side and after that reducing implementation of some JCPOA provisions, but under its full framework and provisions by Iran in an step by step manner and while keeping and following obligations under Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (CSA) and spirit of JCPOA as a tool to return agreement to its track could not influence western side to fulfill its responsibility  based on JCPOA and NPT. In addition, unfortunately and regrettably they  were silent, or in some extent encouraging, some security events and sabotage against Iran’s nuclear installation that are under IAEA safeguards. Events that were conducted by foreign intelligent services and one specific third party They also were silent against assassination of Iranian nuclear scientist by the same specific third party. All these positions show that western side is not prepare to act as a good player in world arena and comply its actions in favor of international law and in this case defending NPT.

Now, current international situation including around Iran nuclear deal is possessing one of the most critical period of international relationship, at least in last decades. World is witnessing emerging new administration in USA as one of the most influencing country or super power that want to change the whole globe and our world based on their own understanding, without considering the real facts on the ground: Canada shall be one province of the USA, Gulf of Mexico shall be renamed to …, Greenland shall to be gifted to USA and …

Regarding  inalienable right of  Iran to develop its own peaceful nuclear technology, and in spite of Iran’s officially declared and well documented policy  on peaceful use of nuclear energy and never attempting to use, research, development or constructing nuclear weapons, USA administration is targeting not only the inalienable right of Iran to benefit from nuclear energy but they are focused on one particular section of nuclear fuel cycle which is important for a sustainable nuclear energy development.

 In this context the USA administration by threatening to use military actions against Iran’s  peaceful nuclear installations and facilities not only is undermining the many relevant IAEA General Conference resolutions about threatening or attacking nuclear facilities devoted for peaceful uses(GC(XXVII)/701,13 October 1983, GC(XXVII)/RES/407-9 November 1983, GC(XXIX)/RES/444, GC(XXXI)/RES/475, GC(XXXIV)/RES/533 of 1990, Prohibition of armed attack or threat of attack against nuclear installations, during operation or under construction, GC(53)/1/Add.2 and GC(53)/20, …), NPT and non-proliferation regime as a whole but also and more important is undermining the UN chapter which stipulates”  States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations, and that the establishment and maintenance of international peace and security are to be promoted with the least diversion for armaments of the world’s human and economic resources”.

It is worthsnoting that all mentioned IAEA GC resolutions, were prepared and approved by general conference in response to behavior and hostile action of one specific third party, while is not participate in any international non-proliferation and disarmament regime, continuously threatens NPT parties in the middle east region.

Now some disseminated news shows that USA is considering a common action together with this third party against Iran’s nuclear programme if negotiation with Iran has not resulted their desired solution. The bitter humor and the ridiculous part of the story is cooperation of USA with a rogue regime, a regime which undermines international humanitarian laws in war against Palestinian and is not adhered to any international tools of non-proliferation and disarmament and its leaders are under warrants of arrest by request of international criminal court (ICC), to attack peaceful nuclear installations of a sovereign state.

Threaten or real military attack or action or even sabotage against Iran’s nuclear installations

 They insist that Iran shall not enrich uranium. This request is an open contradiction with article 4 of NPT and goals of the treaty. The request is on the contradiction with JCPOA text and spirit. As JCPOA is endorsed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (2015) adopted unanimously by the Security Council, because of this the request is in contradiction with obligations of states against UNSC resolutions.

1. As Iran’s all nuclear installations and activities, including uranium enrichment facilities and nuclear related activities in that facilities, are under IAEA safeguards supervision and monitoring regime, so any divergence to non-peaceful use of facility can be detected by IAEA safeguards very soon, and there are no ground for raising divergence pretext.
2. High level officials of Iran repeatedly declare that nuclear weapons have no position in Iran’s security doctrine. Fatwa of the Supreme leader of Iran on prohibition of any movement towards nuclear weaponization is the most important and unique fact in all of the globe that categorically prohibits use of nuclear weapon from religious and ideological point of view.
3. Iran repeatedly declared its preparedness to negotiate about its nuclear programme in order to answer to any concerns of other countries and to resolve by diplomacy any issues related to, within Iran’s rights and respecting its inalienable rights, Threatens Iran is on the contradiction with UN Chapter which stipulates that “States must refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations” .

Considering all above points demonstrate that any military attempts or threatens against Iran shall be considered by worldwide community as a direct shooting to the pillars of the world security and international law specially UN charter and cornerstone of Non-proliferation regime and because of that all members of UN and NPT shall defend their rights and to implement their responsibility in keeping peace and security of the globe, and against coup against international security regardless of their position relative Iran.