TEHRAN – A professor from Oxford University’s Faculty of Oriental Studies says the final report about Iran’s nuclear program by IAEA director general Yukiya Amano “opens the way” for the Board of Governors to close the PMD file.

“The report certainly opens the way for the Board of Governors to declare Iran’s file closed,” Farhang Jahanpour tells the Tehran Times.

Following is the full text of the interview:

Q: IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano has published his “Final Assessment on Past and Present Outstanding Issues Regarding Iran’s Nuclear Programme”. His report has given rise to a great deal of controversy in Iran and in the West. Some people have assessed it as positive while others have said that it repeats some of the old allegations about Iran’s alleged attempts at developing nuclear weapons. What is your assessment of Amano’s final report?

A: As you know, one of the important conditions for the final implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was that the IAEA Director General would issue his report about the possible military dimensions of the Iranian nuclear program (PMD). Without this report, the final implementation of the JCPOA would not be carried out.
After 12 years of intense debate and scrutiny and many allegations about a secret Iranian military nuclear program, the IAEA director general has finally published his “Final Assessment on Past and Present Outstanding Issues regarding Iran’s Nuclear Programme”. It is a very important development that will pave the way for the implementation of the JCPOA agreement and the lifting of the sanctions early in the Christian New Year, maybe as early as next month.
Like any other report, this report is not black and white, but it is as good as it could have been expected. It has certain clauses that are not completely positive for Iran, while at the same time many opponents of the nuclear deal in the West who were hoping that the report would create a new obstacle in the path of the implementation of the agreement are disappointed, because contrary to their expectations it paves the way for its implementation.
Therefore, many people who were opposed to the deal both in Iran and in the West have seized upon some negative aspects of the report and are trying to use it as an excuse to delay the implementation of the agreement. What is important is that the Iranian and Western governments and all those who would like to leave the past behind and to move forward will stress the positive aspects of the report and will use it as a constructive means for the resolution of the nuclear conflict.
Q: What does the report say about the so-called PMD?
A: Many people in the West who were opposed to the nuclear deal had claimed that Iran had engaged in extensive nuclear experimentation for a nuclear bomb and that those efforts have continued to the present time. Various documents were provided to the IAEA by the intelligence organizations of some member states, alleging that they proved Iran’s duplicity and rush to build a bomb.
On the other hand, the NIE (or the National Intelligence Estimate, which is a document that is jointly produced by the group of 16 U.S. intelligence agencies) issued an important report in 2007, and repeated its findings in 2011 and 2013, saying that Iran had experimented with some military applications of nuclear technology prior to 2003, but that she had stopped those experiments after that date.
The IAEA director general’s final assessment broadly supports those findings, but it stresses that, as Iran has always claimed, those activities had not gone beyond planning and basic experiments, and Iran did not produce any nuclear weapons. The report concludes: “The agency has found no credible indications of the diversion of nuclear material in connection with the possible military dimensions to Iran’s nuclear program.” This is a very important sentence and a clear admission that Iran's ""activities did not advance beyond feasibility and scientific studies, and the acquisition of certain relevant technical competences and capabilities."" The report points out that there had been “a range of activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device,"" prior to 2003 and some of those activities had even continued up to 2009, but “they were not part of a coordinated effort.”
The most significant part of the report is the section that states that Iran's ""activities did not advance beyond feasibility and scientific studies, and the acquisition of certain relevant technical competences and capabilities."" In other words, there was no work on the manufacturing of nuclear weapons. Therefore, it is clear that Iran does not have a nuclear weapon, let alone a nuclear arsenal.
The report is confirmation that there has been no diversion of Iranian nuclear activities, and Iran has not violated the NPT’s principles. The important point is not having engaged in some experimentation, but moving forward to manufacturing nuclear weapons, and this is something that Iran has not done.
Many other signatories of the NPT have also carried out research ""relevant to"" nuclear weapons. One can mention South Korea, Taiwan, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina and others, and of course all the nuclear states. However, what is important is that, contrary to the countries that have nuclear arsenals, Iran and the above-mentioned countries have not proceeded to manufacturing nuclear weapons.
Therefore, taken together with the conclusions of the Iran-IAEA Modalities Agreement of August 2007, which resulted in the dismissal of all other allegations against Iran (except for the so-called PMD), this report proves that Iran has not pursued a nuclear weapons program, and hence has not been in violation of the NPT.
Q: What is the next stage? Will the report result in the lifting of all the sanctions?
A: The next stage is that the IAEA Board of Governors should study and approve the report by the director general. According to the JCPOA, the Board of Governors should convene by 15 December 2015 and study the report. The report certainly opens the way for the Board of Governors to declare Iran’s file closed and allow for the lifting of sanctions in January or shortly afterwards. The report provides strong reasons for the Board of Governors to approve it, provided that the decisions are taken on technical and not political grounds. All indications are that it will do so.
Q: Would this mean that Iran’s nuclear program would be normalized and all the issues regarding it be finalized?
A: It is a little early to say that. I believe that the report provides strong incentive for the lifting of all the sanctions. However, given some ambiguous and slightly negative comments in the report, it is likely that the Agency will continue to keep Iran’s program under close scrutiny to ensure that all its activities will remain peaceful.
Given the intense disagreements between Iran and the West and Iran and the IAEA a couple of years ago, the progress has been staggering. However, what is needed is for both sides to move forward with a positive attitude, to continue to build trust and to make sure that in a few years’ time Iran’s program is finally normalized, in keeping with the requirements of the JCPOA.



[Highlight]

“The report is confirmation that there has been no diversion of Iranian nuclear activities, and Iran has not violated the NPT’s principles.”

********
“This [IAEA] report proves that Iran has not pursued a nuclear weapons program, and hence has not been in violation of the NPT.”


******
Amano’s report about Iran’s nuclear program “disappointed” opponents of the nuclear deal in the West who were hoping the report would “create a new obstacle in the path of the implementation of the agreement”