International Atomic Energy Agency; Facilitator or barrier?
Rafael Grossi's completely political and non-legal behavior towards Iran, which is unprecedented, while in the current situation could be considered a serious obstacle to the conclusion of the agreement, it will also darken the prospect of providing the ground for the implementation of the initial commitments of the parties to enter into the possible agreement.
NOURNEWS - Josep Burrell, the coordinator of the European Union, said in a media statement: "The negotiations with the coordination of the European Union have reached an important moment and this is the last millimeter.", while being optimistic about the negotiations to lift the sanctions approaching the final stage.
He noted: "The negotiations are now at a decisive stage."
During the recent weeks and at a stage where the views of Iran and the United States are being exchanged by the European Union coordinator, most of the political officials and media close to the negotiations have announced Borrell's recent comments in different literature.
It is for this reason that the usual opponents of the agreement have tried their best to prevent it from happening in any way possible.
In the meantime, one of the issues that has been put in the hands of the opposition and due to the effective role played by "Rafael Grossi", the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, has become a political and propaganda challenge in the negotiation process, is the issue of safeguards issues between Iran and the IAEA.
From the beginning, Tehran has emphasized the principle that the closure of the security claims case, which all have political roots, is one of the requirements that Iran considers among other requirements for entering into an agreement.
Based on this, the resolution of this issue has always been in line with Iran's unchangeable red lines, and there has been no retreat from it at any stage of the negotiations.
Iran's clear goal for entering into a possible agreement is to remove illegal sanctions and economic profit, and basically, without solving the remaining safeguard issues, which can always be an excuse to put pressure on Iran with a political approach, the agreement will not be meaningful.
It is not difficult to predict that the Islamic Republic of Iran will raise and emphasize the mechanisms it considers to determine the task of the remaining safeguard issues in the negotiations to lift the sanctions, and it should be taken for granted.
Now, if we accept this logical assumption and also assume the optimism of the European Union coordinator regarding the rise of the formation of the Qirin agreement to be true, we will face an obvious contradiction in the political statements of the director general of the agency, which is like swimming against the course of the river.
Bringing up surprising issues such as the need for Iran to provide access to the places and people targeted by the agency, which is not consistent with the previous agreements of the two sides, is practically drawing a line to declare the agency's opposition to an agreement that should be closed with the implementation of those safeguard issues.
According to this; The contradictions between Grossi's recent claims and the negotiation process show that the director general of the agency is trying to prevent an agreement to the best of his ability.
Grossi's previous behavior, such as compiling false reports about Iran's peaceful nuclear activities, traveling to occupied territories and aligning with the most serious opponent of the negotiations, i.e. the Zionist regime, and then submitting a draft anti-Iranian resolution to the Agency's Board of Governors, and his purely political and non-technical statements show It shows that these behaviors are a continuation of the previous political path and there has been no change in it.
Another point is that; Iran has announced from the beginning that it is seriously considering the verification process to ensure the fulfillment of its demands. Naturally, this process regarding all the obligations of the other parties, including the closing of the security cases claimed by the agency, should also be foreseen in the possible agreement.
In such a situation, even if the parties reach a conclusion to reach an agreement, the behavior of the director general of an institution such as the agency, whose special work is technical-legal, but plans and follows up its duties in the most political way possible, will seriously disrupt the verification process and achieve The agreement will make it impossible for different parties to implement mutual obligations.
Rafael Grossi's completely political and non-legal behavior towards Iran, which is unprecedented, while in the current situation it can be considered a serious obstacle to the conclusion of the agreement, it will also darken the prospect of providing the ground for the implementation of the initial commitments of the parties to enter into the implementation of a possible agreement.
Based on this and regardless of the final outcome of the negotiations, what is clear from now on is that; unfortunately, an international legal institution, which according to its constitution should be a facilitator of such diplomatic processes to solve issues and problems between countries, due to the political and completely biased behavior of its Director General, not only does not fulfill its legal duty, but also becomes a platform for violating the legal rights of the members with the aim of enriching hidden and obvious ambitions.
BY: Mohammad Ghaderi
NOUNEWS