An aerial view shows the pack of riders as they cycle along the coast during the 145,5 km third stage of the centenary Tour de France from Ajaccio to Calvi, on the French Mediterranean island of Corsica July 1, 2013. REUTERS/Pascal Pochard-Casabianca/Pool

Reuters Photojournalism

Our day's top images, in-depth photo essays and offbeat slices of life. See the best of Reuters photography.  See more | Photo caption 

Photo

Egypt's Mursi protests

Egyptian President Mohamed Mursi clings to office as protesters demand that he resign.  Slideshow 

Photo

Obama in Africa

President Obama is seeking to build a new economic partnership with Africa at the end of a tour of the fast-growing continent.  Slideshow 

Sponsored Links

Iran may use U.N. nuclear talks to seek leverage with big powers

Related Topics

Herman Nackaerts, head of a delegation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), pulls his suitcases at the airport in Vienna after arriving from Iran January 18, 2013. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger

Herman Nackaerts, head of a delegation of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), pulls his suitcases at the airport in Vienna after arriving from Iran January 18, 2013.

Credit: Reuters/Leonhard Foeger

VIENNA | Tue Jan 22, 2013 10:17am EST

VIENNA (Reuters) - Iran may be holding back from working with a U.N. investigation into its nuclear program to use it as a bargaining chip in pursuit of significant sanctions relief or other concessions in broader negotiations with world powers.

That could explain why United Nations nuclear inspectors once again returned empty-handed after talks last week in Tehran, where they tried to overcome obstacles to a long-stalled inquiry into suspected atomic bomb research by Iran.

Iran has suggested at various times in the past that it would expect a "kind of reward" for cooperating with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), a Western official said, making clear he saw no rationale for this.

If this is Tehran's thinking, a year-long effort by the IAEA to unblock its investigation looks unlikely to succeed as long as separate diplomacy between the six major powers and Tehran remains deadlocked.

"They don't want to offer substantive cooperation," one Western diplomat said after the IAEA's latest stab on January 16-17 at coaxing the Islamic Republic into starting to address questions about its atomic activities.

Another envoy in Vienna, where the U.N. agency is based, described the IAEA's roller-coaster negotiations with Iran as a "well-practiced dance" by Tehran of "two steps backwards, one step forward."

The failure to achieve a breakthrough in the most recent of a series of largely fruitless meetings between the IAEA and Iran marked another setback for diplomatic efforts to resolve the stand-off and head off the threat of a new Middle East war.

Both Iran and the United States, Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia say they want to resume talks after a seven-month hiatus. But the two sides' priorities diverge: the powers want to curb Iranian nuclear work of potential use in developing atomic weapons, while Iran wants sanctions scrapped and their "rights" to enrich uranium formally recognized.

They have yet to announce a date and venue and as delays continue, Iran is amassing more nuclear material that could be turned into bomb fuel if refined further. Israel has threatened military action to foil any nuclear weapons capability in Iran.

The powers, known as the P5+1 as they group the five permanent, veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council along with Germany, want peaceful guarantees on Iran's enrichment program and Iranian transparency toward the IAEA.

Iran, which says it seeks only peaceful nuclear energy from enrichment, is keen above all for the West to remove sanctions expanded last year to block its economically vital oil exports.

"Tehran apparently is seeking to withhold cooperation with the IAEA in order to increase leverage vis-a-vis the P5+1," said Daryl Kimball of the Arms Control Association, a U.S.-based research and advocacy group.

NO REWARD

The IAEA, whose mandate is to forestall the spread of nuclear weapons, has been trying for a year to negotiate a framework agreement with Iran giving its inspectors access to sites, officials and documents for their investigation.

After the previous meeting in mid-December, the IAEA said progress had been made and that it expected to seal the deal in this month's session. But after the two days of talks last week it said "important differences" remained.

A new round of IAEA-Iran discussions has been scheduled for February 13, which may allow for the global powers and Tehran to meet first to try and make headway in the wider dispute.

"Iran might think that if it grants access now, it may be in a weaker position to demand sanctions relief in a few week's time," said Shashank Joshi, a senior fellow and Middle East specialist at the Royal United Services Institute.

But the Western official said he saw no willingness among the powers "to pay any kind of reward" to Iran if it allowed the IAEA to resume its inquiry: "We think that is separate and it is in Iran's own interest to cooperate with the IAEA."

The powers and Iran last met in June, when Tehran rejected demands to halt its higher-grade enrichment and close an underground nuclear plant in exchange for limited sanctions relief, such as an end to a ban on imports of aviation spare parts, as well as civilian nuclear cooperation.

"Iran has always linked the IAEA and the P5+1 talks," Cliff Kupchan at political risk consultancy Eurasia Group said.

"They don't like what's on offer from the Western nations in the main talks, so they're holding all their chits, including ones relevant to the IAEA, for the main talks."

Hossein Mousavian, a former Iranian nuclear negotiator, said Iran and the powers should agree in their next meeting a "package consisting of all major requirements" of both sides.

"This should include technical demands of the IAEA and also address Iranian demands for recognition of its rights for enrichment and lifting sanctions. If so, then the IAEA would be able to have a successful visit to Tehran," he said.

(Editing by Mark Heinrich)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (4)
Logical123 wrote:
This article shows a poor understanding of the issues. Iran has offered to open Parchin for inspection on two conditions that have nothing to do with the negotiations with the P5+1. First, IAEA must provide to Iran the documents that supposedly make claims that Iran has made efforts related to nuclear weapons. Secondly, the IAEA must define the scope of its inquiries. That is, if they visit Parchin and find nothing, will they finally shut up or will they then ask to visit 10 other sites?

Jan 22, 2013 11:08am EST  --  Report as abuse
justinolcb wrote:
we’ve been round & round & round this moutain for decades now… neither the UN nor Iran are serious

Jan 22, 2013 11:21am EST  --  Report as abuse
americanguy wrote:
In 1998 Russia and the US agreed to inspections by each other of their nuclear missile bases. We have inspected each others’ sites until the START treaty expired and a new one is in the works.
I have no sympathy for Iran at all, and there are no excuses for Iran’s refusal to allow inspections.
Iran is hiding something, and it has to be nuclear weapons production.
Cut off the head of the snake with more sanctions until it starves to death.
Enough playing around with the Iranian so called “religious leader” liars.
If Israel wants to continue to get US welfare, they need to open up to the US for inspections of their weapons also, or we should cut their free money off.

Jan 22, 2013 11:43am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.