Parchin

Updated 8/22/2015

These people know what they're doing. Image via Nima Shirazi.

Just a quicky backgrounder on the Iran scandale du jour—

#IsraeltheRegion #Iran #Parchin #Irannucleardeal UN to let Iran inspect its own alleged nuclear activity site http://t.co/6JUEhpWHUn

— Israel News (@IsraelNewsNow) August 19, 2015

—based on information posted last Sunday at the Arms Control Law blog from Dr. Yousaf Butt, nuclear physicist and senior scientific advisor to the British American Security Information Council (BASIC) in London:

1. The alleged research IAEA wants to check out at the Parchin site, involving the testing of conventional, not nuclear, explosives, was done if it was done at all before 2005; so the fear that the Iranians are suddenly hustling to clean it up is not quite realistic, and if it's about nuclear research that would be nuclear research that they gave up 12 or 13 years ago, not any active program.

2.

The IAEA has visited Parchin twice before and found nothing of concern, possibly because they were targeting the wrong building(s) before, or because there is no actual evidence of nuclear-materials related research at Parchin. The IAEA then stated:

The Agency was given free access to those buildings and their surroundings and was allowed to take environmental samples, the results of which did not indicate the presence of nuclear material, nor did the Agency see any relevant dual use equipment or materials in the locations visited.

If the IAEA happened to be targeting the wrong buildings before, it could also be targeting the wrong building(s) now. The intel the Agency was/is relying on for its allegations appears to be not very solid. Hopefully, the protocol worked out between Iran and the IAEA at the conclusion of the JCPOA provides a framework to reach a quick final conclusion.

3.

Dr. El Baradei who was head of the IAEA when the Parchin and the “Alleged Studies” (now known as PMD) file first surfaced had reservations about the quality of the intel involved, stating: “The IAEA is not making any judgment at all whether Iran even had weaponisation studies before [2003] because there is a major question of authenticity of the documents.” [emphasis added]

4. Should there be any residue from illicit nuclear activities at the site it is inside the buildings and will not be affected by any paving or construction outside. It cannot be "cleaned up" at all but will be revealed by swipe samples, no matter who takes them, Iranians or IAEA inspectors.

These people do not know what they're doing. Trust me.

It is clear to me that what the Iranian security people are upset about has to do with non-nuclear weapons work, which they have a right to carry on without interference or inspection—if I'm wrong, as I say, it will be found out.

5. It's hard to find a source for the story that isn't either Israeli or US rightwing noise machine, but an AP account clarifies that it's based on what appears to be an unsigned draft document that one anonymous official claims is similar to the final agreement (between Iran and IAEA, not the P5 + 1 group), which is not a whole lot of authenticity.

6. If the IAEA thinks they can live with the arrangement, I'd like to mention that they have a really strong record in the field, kind of better than US Republicans (who gave us, as you'll remember, a nuclear-armed North Korea and destroyed Iraq for no reason). The hope expressed by Dr. Butt in point 2 above is clearly justified.

Update 8/22: Via Juan Cole and from expert Gary Sick and others, the whole story about IAEA "allowing" Iran to do its own inspections is bullshit anyway. Of course IAEA inspectors would be present at all swipings. AP seems to have withdrawn most of the false allegations from their story.