US cannot inspect Iran's nuclear facilities without IAEA coordination: Former IAEA official

TABNAK, Apr. 21 - Former head of the Transparency Department of the International Atomic Energy Agency, believes that any inspection of Iran's nuclear facilities should be carried out under the auspices of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and the agency must first have permission.

News ID: 6316

Date: 21 April 2025 - 12:45

The New York Times, citing sources, claimed that Iran has raised the possibility of a joint venture to run its nuclear enrichment facility, an option that would allow the Trump administration to claim it has reached a deal different from the Obama-era agreement.

It is not clear whether the United States or a third country, preferably one of Iran’s Persian Gulf Arab neighbors, would be a partner in the project, the report said, to provide an additional layer of assurance that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful.

The senior official declined to be named due to the sensitivity of the negotiations.On the other hand, the Guardian reports that Russia could play a key role in the Iran nuclear deal. Moscow is seen as a possible destination for Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium and as a potential arbitrator in the event of a breach of the deal.

To shed more light on the issue, TABNAK reached out to Tareq Rauf, former head of the Transparency Department of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Here is the full text of the interview.

New York Times in a report claims that “Iran has raised the possibility of a joint venture to run its nuclear enrichment facilities, an option that would allow the Trump administration to declare it has struck a different kind of deal than the Obama administration did. It is unclear if the United States or a third country, preferably one of Iran’s Arab neighbors in the Persian Gulf, would be the partner, offering an extra layer of assurance that its program is peaceful.” Do you think Iran would agree to such a thing?

This is not a new idea, It was proposed by DG ElBaradei in 2003 and then and in 2005/2006; and I as leader of the IAEA LEU Reserve and IAEA LEU Bank had suggested that Iran contribute its enriched uranium to the IAEA in 2009/2010. However, Iran rejected. It would make sense to convert Natanz and Fordow into an International Uranium Enrichment Centre with AEOI owning 60% shares, and sell 10% shares each to Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and UAE. Only Iranians would have access to centrifuges, but the partners would manage the business jointly. Alternatively, AEOI keeps 60% shares, sells the US 10%, EU 10%, UAE 10% and Russia 10%, or some combination. Limit enrichment to industry standard of 4;95%.

The Trump administration has stated that it does not accept UN inspections (by the International Atomic Energy Agency - IAEA) of Iran’s nuclear facilities and insists that American inspectors should carry out the task. Regardless of Iran's response, is such a thing technically feasible? And if so, what would the IAEA's role be?

Only IAEA is recognized as competent international authority for nuclear verification. Under a new Iran-US arrangement, US inspectors could join IAEA inspectors in inspections but remain at all times under IAEA authority and rules. Argentina and Brazil have bilateral verification with involvement of IAEA and a regional organization; is one different example.

The Guardian newspaper reports that Russia may play a key role in Iran's nuclear deal. Moscow is being considered both as a potential destination for Iran's enriched uranium stockpiles and as a possible arbitrator in case of a violation of the agreement. Assuming this is true, what is your assessment of this development?

Russia previously said it would NOT take in Iranian enriched uranium, as it did in 2015/2016 under JCPOA. It might change its position now but likely would like to be paid to do so.

Rafael Grossi, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), stated in an interview with the Italian media outlet La Repubblica on Sunday that “the U.S. and Iran are close to an agreement, but it requires monitoring. Only the IAEA can guarantee oversight of what Washington and Tehran agree upon.” Grossi's emphasis on the IAEA's necessity in the Iran-U.S. deal comes as Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s Foreign Minister, had previously stated that there is currently no need for the IAEA to join the negotiations. What is your assessment?

IAEA is not party to JCPOA and any new future agreement. IAEA can do verification when specially requested as under JCPOA.UNSCR 2231 and in connection with NPT. But IAEA cannot unilaterally demand to do verification if not requested, it does not have that authority. Except when a country like Iran has NPT safeguards and/or has agreed to additional verification under JCPOA. As in JCPOA, IAEA would be consulted by both Iran and US as regards verification measures the two countries would agree on, separate from NPT safeguards.