Iran Playing With Fire

OFFICIALS from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) began talks in Teheran yesterday against a worrying backdrop: Iran's nuclear aims are drawing the country into an international confrontation which it can ill-afford. Teheran's policy is that it will not compromise on its right to have nuclear technology or to conduct uranium enrichment. That is fair enough, but it is not good enough. This truth has been underlined by IAEA chief Mohamed El Baradei, who has warned that Iran must cooperate fully with his inspectors or face accusations that it is secretly building a nuclear weapons capability. According to the IAEA, traces of weapons-grade enriched uranium were found in Iran; Teheran argues that the equipment was contaminated before being purchased - without saying where the imported parts came from. This attitude hardly creates trust. The point, then, is not the production of electricity - the stated goal of Iran's nuclear programme - but Teheran's ability to convince the nuclear watchdog that it is not pursuing a nuclear weapons agenda. In an indication of the urgency which it attaches to the issue, the IAEA has given Teheran until Oct 31 to answer all its questions. But instead of providing proof of its peaceful intentions, Iran appears to be set on a collision course with the agency. Angered by the IAEA asking it to halt uranium enrichment, Iran says that it will give inspectors only limited access to nuclear sites. That approach could see the Islamic republic's case being taken to the United Nations Security Council. It could face economic and diplomatic sanctions. Surely, not even plentiful electricity is worth that price.

The price grows higher when factored into the dispute is the fact that behind the threat of sanctions lies the strength of the United States, which accuses Iran of enriching uranium to make nuclear weapons. The European Union, too, wants it to stop activities which could produce fissile material. Unless Teheran can convince the IAEA, it will continue to feel the heat from Washington, which has branded it part of an 'axis of evil'. It took a war and a regime change for Iraq, another member of that axis, to free itself of the designation; the third member, North Korea, has embarked on a course that could result in a serious confrontation with its neighbours and the US. The stakes are high for Iran. If it has nothing to hide, it should be able to prove that it has nothing to hide by providing the answers which the IAEA seeks. Playing games with the inspectors is not only offensive but also dangerous. The point is not lost on observers that, should Iran go nuclear, the pressure on Washington to act would not be slight, Iran being, as well, an avowed enemy of Israel and a country which the US has accused of sponsoring international terrorism. Are Iranians willing to face the consequences of going nuclear?

The problem is that the nuclear issue has become a show of strength, not only between Iran and the rest of the world, but also within the country itself. It has come in handy to hardliners, who believe that Teheran must not be swayed by international pressure. For example, the editor of a hardline newspaper wants the country to pull out of the Non-Proliferation Treaty altogether. However, saner counsel in Teheran argues otherwise. That counsel should prevail in the broader area of working with the IAEA. Before travelling to Teheran, Mr Pierre Goldschmidt, a deputy director-general of the agency, said that he expected to make 'great progress' in his talks. Iran's leaders owe themselves at least that much.