Majlis Research Center:

Washington tends to conflict management instead of confrontation with Iran options

Resolution of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors in September 2012 was analyzed by Majlis Research Center.
According to the Public Relations Office of Majlis Research Center, the 150th meeting of the International Atomic Energy Agency’s Board of Governors was held for five days in 10-14 Sep. 2012, the Office of political Studies said.
Review IAEA Director General’s report on Iran, nuclear safety and how the implementation of safeguards in Syria, North Korea and the Middle East were the main topics discussed at the meeting. There were four options for Iran: Report to the Security Council, resolutions, statements and substantive review of Yukiya Amano’s review that ultimately Board of Governors passed a resolution no consensus on Sep. 13, 2012. Of 35 members of Board of Governors, Cuba voted against and Egypt, Tunisia and Ecuador abstained. All four countries are considered “NAM” members. Final resolution of the Board of Governors (GOV/2011/69) was passed on November 18, 2011. Yukiya Amano’s Report on August 30, 2012 was the basis of resolutions of the IAEA. The resolution was issued while NAM members issued a statement in support of Iran’s nuclear peaceful activities on September 13, 2012.
Accordingly, Yukiya Amano must report on the implementation of the present resolution to the Board of Governors in November 2012. After the IAEA Director General’s remarks, the report outlined political considerations of Islamic Republic of Iran and Board of Governors’ resolutions are as follows:
A) Washington’s tend to conflict management instead of confrontation with Iran options
Washington’s approach of sanctions is based on reduction options. In this approach, Washington’s allies to reduce oil imports from Iran, the countries will be exempt from America’s banking and financial sanctions. In other words, Washington in the present situation, instead of military confrontation option calls for conflict management with the sanction of other countries, even if these sanctions are symbolic or ineffective. For example, Belgium, Japan, Great Britain, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Hungary, Spain, China, Singapore, Malaysia, Taiwan, Sri Lanka, Turkey, South Korea, India and South Africa are among the countries that have been exempted from America’s unilateral sanctions list by Washington because they reduce oil imports from Iran. Also, Washington’s support of the resolution as a part of a strategy of psychological warfare and persuasion allies of the United States to impose new sanctions should be assessed.
B) Impede the implementation of the Act of Parliament to provide 20 thousand megawatts of nuclear power

IAEA Board of Governors resolutions and focus on the Parchin and Fordo facilities, with the goal of creating a barrier to build 10 enrichment plants that Iran plans to build them. According to the Act, Islamic Republic of Iran must provide twenty thousand megawatt of nuclear power to meet its requirements that it entails the construction of a new uranium enrichment facility and indigenous production of nuclear energy. Due to leakage of information by IAEA inspectors team, Iran’s consideration in this section is more intelligent-military.
C) To reduce the possibility of future understandings in negotiation with Iran and IAEA
Substantive review of Yukiya Amano’s report and resolutions of the Board of Governors indicate that the output of nuclear talks between Iran and the Agency did not have tangible results and the atmosphere reminded the military nuclear activities in Parchin facility and the center of Zionist war propaganda tends towards disablement of Parchin facility or Fordo enrichment facility.


Conflict Management, Confrontation, IAEA, Islamic Republic of Iran, NAM, Oil Imports, Options, Reduction, Sanctions