A double nuclear problem for Iran's incoming president
With only days to go to the Iranian presidential election, Israeli Strategic Affairs and Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz has warned that it could be only a matter of weeks before Iran crosses the ‘red line’ of nuclear capability drawn by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Israel, having been persuaded to hold off any decision on attacking Iran’s nuclear facilities until after the election, is clearly concerned about any spuriously dovish interpretation of the outcome, and the hawks are trying to pre-empt any such interpretation. At the same time, we have been receiving intelligence reports about intense Saudi Arabian pressure on Tehran over its earthquake-prone nuclear reactor at Bushehr.
On the nuclear weapons front, Israeli sources have noted in particular the timing of Sunday’s announcement by Iran that is has installed the heavy water vessel at reactor IR-40 near Arak. They consider this to be a significant signal of defiance, coming just after the imposition of another round of sanctions and just ahead of the 14 June presidential election.
The Arak reactor has the potential to provide Iran with around 8kg-10kg of military-grade plutonium a year, which is the amount needed for two nuclear weapon cores per year. This is seen as an alternative to the uranium-enrichment route that attracts most international attention. Iran says that IR-40 will be used to produce radioisotopes for medical purposes and will replace a research reactor in Tehran. However, this conflicts with its other claim that its 20% enriched uranium is intended for the production of nuclear fuel for the Tehran reactor.
The schedule for IR-40 is for pre-commissioning tests during the final quarter of 2013 followed by commissioning in early 2014. Full operation would occur in the last quarter of 2014. However, Iran will need to activate a ‘hot lab’ to separate the plutonium from the un-enriched uranium used as fuel, which will extend the timescale. Plutonium is considered to be superior to enriched uranium for the the purposes of producing a nuclear warhead to be fitted to a ballistic missile as the amount needed to produce a core for a small bomb is three times smaller than the amount needed to produce a core for an enriched uranium bomb.
Netanyahu and his supporters believe that no matter who wins the Iranian presidential election, Iran’s nuclear policy will continue on its current course. Speaking earlier this week, Steinitz said that the only person who counts in Iran is Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei: “He is the leader and he makes the decisions and he already made his decision to spend many billions of dollars on building this nuclear industry with only one aim.”
However, the doves argue that it is not entirely true to say that no matter who is president, foreign policy will continue as before. They point out that while outgoing president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had a doleful effect on Iran’s international relations, Ahmadinejad’s predecessor, reformist President Mohammad Khatami, had a more positive impact. Neither was completely in alignment with Khamenei.
Some, at least, consider it mildly positive that both the conservative candidate Ali Akbar Velayati and the reformist-backed Hasan Rowhani come from the country’s foreign policy establishment – and may, suggest the optimists, take a more professional approach to nuclear negotiations. Velayati, for instance, has been openly critical of the approach taken in the nuclear negotiations by the pro-Khamenei candidate and nuclear negotiator Said Jalili.
One of Jalili’s main campaign slogans is “Resistance”. But in a recent election debate on TV, Velayati said: “Resistance has to be accompanied by wisdom. This means that we have to stand against their [the West’s] greedy demands, and have wisdom with regard to finding solutions to the problems they create for us.”
In further criticism, Velayati said: “What our people see is that you have been in charge of the nuclear negotiations for years; no progress has been made so far and we have been facing increasing sanctions and our people bear the brunt.”
Jalili’s response was to say that “the current of doubt” should be “push[ed] aside by relying on our faith”.
At least some Western experts are saying that the key to interpreting the election outcome, and the level of public support for the hardline nuclear stance, will lie in the support accorded to Jalili. But the Israeli hawks view this as simplistic, partly because of the overriding Khamenei factor, and partly because the concerns of the electorate are obviously domestic and economic. Official figures, which almost certainly underestimate the problems, put inflation at 32% and unemployment 14%, with youth unemployment pressing 30%. Government oil revenues dropped by over 27% from 2011 to 2012. If the public doesn’t support Jalili it will not necessary mean that they have expressed their judgement over the nuclear question.
Whatever the outcome, and the interpretation, it is certain that Israel will significantly increase its calls for action from this coming weekend (or, at the very latest, from the following weekend should the election go to a second round). But although this might be the most-pressing, it will not be the only nuclear issue on the new president’s agenda.
Last week, the Arab Gulf states sought reassurances from Iran over the safety of its Bushehr nuclear reactor, which is located in an earthquake zone far closer to the Gulf states’ capitals than to Tehran. The United Arab Emirates and Saudi Arabia raised the question at the 3-7 June meeting of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), prompted by the powerful earthquake that hit the area on 9 April.
The problem is not only that Bushehr is located in an earthquake zone but also that Iran is the only country with a nuclear plant that is not a part of the nuclear safety convention.
It has been reported that the reactor was shut down in mid-May, but Iran’s ambassador to Moscow, Mahmoud Reza Sajjadi, said on 10 May that there was no link between the shut down and the earthquake. Sajjadi said the problem was to do with the generator and that Iran was working closely with Russian experts to solve the problem.
Sajjadi said: "There is absolutely no link to the earthquake here. The nuclear power plant is designed to sustain a powerful earthquake." Asked whether the plant had been put back on line, he said: "I do not have any current information."
Intelligence reports from the region suggest that Saudi Arabia, in particular, has been issuing the direst warnings to Tehran about safety at Bushehr. One report received by this service from a Western intelligence source even suggested that after the 9 April earthquake Saudi Arabia had threatened Tehran with nuclear retaliation (using one of the Pakistani nuclear weapons that Saudi Arabia financed) should a nuclear accident at Bushehr ever lead to contamination of Saudi Arabian territory. JdeC.
NOTE: The six remaining candidates in Iran’s 14 June presidential election are:
- Hassan Rowhani, former nuclear negotiator and a member of the Supreme National Security Council. He is a creature of the clerical establishment and his reformist image may owe more to hope than reality.
- Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, mayor of Tehran since 2005 and a former commander of the Revolutionary Guard. Seen as a conservative, although possibly capable of introducing some reform.
- Said Jalili, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator and a protégé of Khamenei.
- Ali Akbar Velayati is a foreign policy advisor to Khamenei and has served as foreign minister. His daughter is married to Khamenei’s son.
- Mohsen Rezaei, currently the secretary of Iran's Expediency Council
- Mohammad Gharazi, a former head of the Ministry of Petroleum.
If no candidate receives more than 50% of the votes cast, the election will go to a second round run-off between the top two finishers a week later on 21 June. This is considered likely.