IAEA Fears Deep Split if Iran Case Goes to UN Council

Louis Charbonneau, Reuters:

The U.N. atomic watchdog fears referring Iran to the U.N. Security Council now for possible sanctions would split its members and would rather set a new deadline for Iran to halt sensitive work, diplomats said.

The 35-nation governing board of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) begins on Monday. The main issue will be an EU-U.S. plan to refer Iran to the Security Council, which could lead to economic sanctions over fears Iran seeks nuclear arms.

"Everything points in the direction of a need for more time. So it would be in everbody's favor to give it some three or four weeks," a senior diplomat close to the Vienna-based atomic watchdog told Reuters on Wednesday on condition of anonymity. READ MORE

The European Union's three biggest powers -- France, Britain and Germany -- joined forces with Washington to back a Council referral after Tehran resumed sensitive nuclear activities at its Isfahan uranium processing plant last month. Work at the plant had been suspended under a November deal with the EU.

"It is clear that everybody is looking for a solution that would avoid confrontation. This would give the time needed to arrive at a package solution," the diplomat said. "(A) quick decision now would create a deep division in the (IAEA) board."

The EU trio has said it would not seek immediate sanctions and would only gradually increase the pressure on Iran. EU diplomats reacted to the senior diplomat's comments by saying they had no interest in delaying a Security Council referral.

Iran denies wanting atom bombs and says the West is trying to deprive it of its right to a full nuclear energy program.

Other diplomats said IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei suggested to U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the IAEA's governing board could instead set a deadline for Iran to resume a suspension of sensitive atomic activities and help the U.N. resolve outstanding questions about Iran's nuclear program.

"It would be an (IAEA board) resolution that would call on Iran to not only go back to full suspension but to provide the transparency and cooperation requested by ElBaradei. It would have to have a deadline," the senior diplomat said.

EX-INSPECTOR DISAGREES WITH ELBARADEI

However, ElBaradei's former deputy and chief IAEA inspector, Pierre Goldschmidt, wrote in an opinion piece for the New York Times that the IAEA board should not hesitate to report Iran to the Security Council for concealing its uranium enrichment program from the IAEA for nearly two decades.

"A failure by the board to make such a report would considerably weaken the agency and the global non-proliferation regime. It would reveal that the world is unwilling to hold rule-breakers to account, inviting proliferation by other countries," Goldschmidt, who retired this summer, wrote.

Diplomats from the EU's "big three" agreed with Goldschmidt. They said it would make no sense to postpone a Security Council referral and were confident the Western proposal could withstand a vote next week.

"We have a majority of the 35 IAEA board members," an EU diplomat said. "You will never reach concensus with a Security Council referrral. There will always be countries opposed."

"If we set a deadline, then there would have to be another board meeting with the new (2005/2006) IAEA board, which will have more NAM (non-aligned movement states) on it," he said.

"Delaying will only make it more difficult. It has to be now," another senior Western diplomat said.

(Additional reporting by Paul Hughes in Tehran)