Tehran, Olli Heinonen has expressed his view of the upcoming meetings between Iran and the six powers on the country’s nuclear case.
![](/files/en/news/2014/7/1/16919_152.jpg)
Former IAEA inspector Olli Heinonen’s
correspondence with Mehr News Agency on the horizon of Iran’s nuclear deal with the West:
1-As you know Iran and
six world powers start a new round of talks onJuly 2and will
continue until at leastJuly 15, so is it possible they reach
comprehensive deal in the end of talks?
It appears that the
views of parties are still far apart when it comes to the establishment
of "a mutually defined enrichment programme with practical limits and
transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the programme” of Iran,
which is one of the key objectives of the Joint Plan of Action. The gap is
wide, but two weeks of negotiations is also quite long time in international
diplomacy. Question is then whether innovative solutions are found to
bridge the gaps. It will be tough, but it is doable.
2- Senior diplomats
from six world powers met in Brusselson Thursdayto search for ways
to resuscitate negotiations with Iran, is there any problem within the six
powers group about Iran nuclear issue?
Each power have likely
its own concerns and understanding on risks and priorities. However, we need to
keep in our minds that five of these powers are permanently in the UN Security
Council, which has made half a dozen resolutions on the Iranian nuclear
activities. Those resolutions spell clearly out that they have a common concern
about scope and content of the nuclear program of Iran.
3- In previous talks
Iran and six world powers said there are difference views about comprehensive
deal, what are these differences?
There are number
differences from the number of centrifuges installed, stocks of enriched uranium,
redesign of Arak heavy water reactor, addressing of the military dimensions to
sanctions relief and to the length of the agreement.
4-Western officials
have said very little progress has been made after five rounds of talks since
February towards striking a deal that could end years of hostility, how is
possible this little progress to change a big progress?
This is about
confidence building, which will take time. The first step is to have confidence
that deal is faithfully implemented when agreed. The next step to build
confidence is then the actual implementation of the deal on ground; as they
say, the taste is in the pudding.
5-Six powers want it
to cut down the number of uranium centrifuges in operation, but Iran do not
accept this issue yet, as you know Iran do not seek for nuclear weapon but six
powers want to reduce the centrifuge, how is it possible two sides solve these
differences?
When I look back to
the history of the Iranian nuclear program I see that Iran holds most of the
keys to solve this part of the problem. In order to reduce the confidence
deficit, Iran should come with realistic numbers of centrifuges, which are
really needed to develop its nuclear program further. One of the
questions to address is that does it really make sense to produce fuel for one
or handful of light water reactors domestically. Most of the countries have
opted for buying fuel from commercial vendors, which produce it economically
and can ensure the safety and quality of deliveries. Fuel manufacturing has its
own know-how, which can only be obtained from the reactor designer. In
addition, it is not only about enrichment or fuel fabrication. One needs also
uranium, which resources are limited in Iran. By being also more forthcoming is
addressing questions related to the military dimension of the nuclear program,
Iran can pave way for a comprehensive agreement. Addressing these questions would
enable the other party be more forthcoming on the parameters for the future of
the uranium enrichment programof
Iran.