Gains and Losses of the Historic Iranian Nuclear Framework Deal
A historic deal… This was how Obama called the framework deal on the Iranian nuclear program. And really it is a historic, or more probably, can become a historic one, if the sides fulfill their commitments. After so many years of negotiations, sanctions imposed on Iran, disputes, even a threat that military actions will start, if a deal is not reached, here we have a framework agreement which is said to become foundation upon which the final text of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) will be written between now and June 30, and reflect the significant progress that has been made in discussions between Iran and the six world powers.
Of course, the fact that now there is a framework agreement after such difficult negotiations, means that, as it is considered the art of negotiations, the sides have made compromises, but not more than they wanted or not more that would make them worse off. So according to the framework deal, what are the gains and losses of Iran and the US? Will there really be a final deal?
If one carefully examines the framework nuclear deal, it becomes obvious that both sides have made concessions. The biggest compromise from both sides that is the most eye-catching one, around which the sides have long been negotiating, is the number of centrifuges for uranium enrichment. At this moment Iran has 19,000 centrifuges enriching uranium, the six world powers were initially demanding to cut the number to several hundreds, whereas Iran was claiming that it will not give up even a single one. But in the framework deal we have 5,060 centrifuges enriching uranium for 10 years.
Another major compromise was reached around Iran's Fordow and Natants facilities – the main facilities of Iran of uranium enrichment. The US President Barack Obama, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown in 2009 revealed the existence of the facility and declared that the size and configuration of this facility is inconsistent with a peaceful program. Iran informed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that the aim of Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant (FFEP) is, as nti.org reports, production of UF6 enriched both to 5% U-235 for power reactors and 20% U-235 for research reactors. Though no prove was found that the Fordow facility was for non-peaceful means, due to its big size and configuration, the six world powers were calling on Iran to close it down, whereas this was unacceptable for Iran.
However, according to the deal the sides came to an agreement on Fordow facility: Iran agreed not to enrich uranium at that facility for about 15 years and instead of closing the facility, convert it into a nuclear, physics, technology research center. At the same time the sides have agreed that the two-thirds of the centrifuges and infrastructure will be removed, the remaining ones will be put under IAEA monitoring.
As for Natanz nuclear facility, which is the primary base of Iran's uranium centrifuge program, the Iran's intentions to develop nuclear fuel cycle in this facility was revealed in 2002. It was in 2003, during IAEA Director General Mohammed El-Baradei's visit to Tehran, when Iran officially declared that it was constructing the FEP and PFEP at Natanz. Following the negotiations with France, Germany, the UK (E3) and the European Union (EU), Iran agreed to suspend enrichment and conversion activities, but in 2006 it resumed enrichment program. Thus according to the framework deal, "Iran has agreed to only enrich uranium using its first generation (IR-1 models) centrifuges at Natanz for ten years, removing its more advanced centrifuges."
Concerning the Arak nuclear complex, under the framework deal Iran has agreed to redesign and rebuild it, supporting only peaceful nuclear research. As nti.org writes "heavy water reactors are of proliferation concern because they are optimal for the production of high quality, weapons-grade plutonium. The reactors also do not require enriched uranium to produce weapons-usable material, as they are fueled by natural uranium." Thus on mutually agreed compromises, Iran "will not accumulate heavy water in excess of the needs of the modified Arak reactor, and will sell any remaining heavy water on the international market for 15 years."
In addition to all these, for the sake of transparency, monitoring will be done in Natanz and Fordow facilities by IAEA, also for 25 years inspectors will have access to uranium mines and continuous surveillance at uranium mills, where Iran produces yellowcake. According to the framework deal Iran will also provide IAEA with greater access and information concerning Iran’s nuclear program.
Of course, all these compromises from the Iranian side would be meaningless, if there was no release of sanctions. With the framework deal the sides agreed to lift sanctions from Iran, if the letter commits all its obligations undertaken by the deal. As the framework deal says "U.S. and E.U. nuclear-related sanctions will be suspended after the IAEA has verified that Iran has taken all of its key nuclear-related steps. If at any time Iran fails to fulfill its commitments, these sanctions will snap back into place." The UN Security Council resolutions will also be lifted, if Iran addresses all the questions of main concern. However, it is important to mention that the "U.S. sanctions on Iran for terrorism, human rights abuses, and ballistic missiles will remain in place under the deal."
Thus we see that the framework deal is something which refers to all aspect of the Iranian nuclear program and covers all the aspect of the main concern. It is difficult to say which side compromised more, and which one gained, but the most important thing is the fact – there is a framework deal. Of course, there are a lot of questions concerning the deal, a lot of skepticism that on June 30 there will be a final deal. The main suspicions come from the fact that it has been a long time Iran and the six world powers have been negotiating, but there has never been even a single hope that there will be an agreement. Even before the eight days of marathon talks many were skeptical that there could be a deal. If we try to find a reason for such a move, then probably we will state that it was already the impossibility for Iran to live and develop with sanctions and the great desire of Obama, which needed to fulfill one of his campaign promises to raise his reputation that made the framework deal possible. In this case the possibility of the final deal is 50:50, the main responsibility of its success lying on Iran. Now it will be accessing its losses and gains, and if the gains are even slightly more than the losses, the deal, most probably will be there.
Other materials on this subject
- Putin Has Phone Talk With Iran President The political settlement in Syria was initiated by Russia, Turkey and Iran, who also vowed to act as guarantors of the settlement of the Syrian conflict.
- Iran Says Awaits US Response to Nuclear Talks 'Solutions' The negotiations, aimed at bringing the US back into the deal and Iran to full compliance with it, had stalled for about two months.
- US Prepares New Options on Iran in Case Negotiations on Nuclear Deal Fail "Because of the way that the Iranians approached and participated in the last round of talks, the President asked the national security team to be prepared in the event that diplomacy fails and to take...
- Iran Ready for Resultative Talks on Nuclear Deal — Top Diplomat "Despite the fact that the West is not implementing its commitments, Iran, for the sake of demonstrating its good will and with an eye of the lifting of the unilateral and illegal sanctions, is again ready...
- Iran Dismisses Idea of Talks with EU and U.S. to Revive 2015 Nuclear Deal The United States said it was disappointed but remained ready to “re-engage in meaningful diplomacy” and would consult with the other major powers to seek a way forward.
-
17:08
The regular session of the Anti-corruption Policy Council takes place in Jermuk
-
15:05
The Prime Minister sends congratulatory messages to the supreme leader of Iran and the President of Iran
-
11:11
Armenia sends earthquake aid to Turkey
-
10:43
Commemoration of the Pontiff St. Sahak Partev
-
09:16
Some roads are closed and difficult to pass in Armenia
-
19:55
Phone conversation of the Foreign Minister of Armenia with the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs
-
18:30
Prime Minister Pashinyan and President Khachaturyan meet
-
18:20
Ararat Mirzoyan with Co-Chairman of the OSCE Minsk Group of France Brice Roquefeuil
-
17:01
Humans could land on Mars within 10 years, Musk predicts
-
16:45
France, US urge 'immediate' end to Nagorno Karabakh blockade
-
16:01
Blockaded Nagorno Karabakh launches fundraiser to support quake-hit Syria
-
15:59
Earthquake death toll in Turkey rises to 18,342
-
15:43
Ararat Mirzoyan Held a Telephone Conversation with Sergey Lavrov
-
15:06
French president rules out fighter jet supplies to Ukraine in near future
-
14:47
5 Day Weather Forecast in Armenia
-
14:44
President Vahagn Khachaturyan wrote a note in the book of condolences opened in the Embassy of Syria in Armenia
-
14:20
Azerbaijan’s provocations impede establishment of peace and stability – Armenian FM tells Russian Co-Chair of OSCE MG
-
12:57
France representation to OSCE: Paris calls on Azerbaijan to restore freedom of movement through Lachin corridor
-
11:40
Command of Kosovo forces highly appreciated preparation of Armenian peacekeepers
-
10:16
The United States withdrew from sanctions against Syria for six months the provision of assistance after the earthquake
day
week
month
Humidity: 43%
Wind: 1.03 km/h