Iran Special: The Stalled Nuclear Talks --- Why Tehran Cannot Give Up Its Right to Enrichment

Funeral of assassinated nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, 13 January 2012

---

On Saturday, after two days of high-level nuclear discussions had reached a dead end, Western diplomats told reporters they were "puzzled" by Iran's position in the nuclear talks.

However, Tehran's position --- notably its refusal to back down over its "right to enrichment" --- is not surprising at all.

Iran's stance that its people have that right has become more than a negotiating position. It is an important element of the Islamic Republic's identity and an issue of national pride. A central symbol of the struggle against the US and the West, the dedication to that right is beyond the black-and-white narrative of "the West says Iran is building a bomb, Tehran says it isn't".

For that reason, to accept the West's proposals this weekend in Kazakhstan =-- halting all enrichment of uranium to 20% at the Fordoo plant for six months in return for very limited sanctions relief --- would have been a major defeat. It would have dealt a psychological blow to the Islamic Republic's national psyche at a sensitive time domestically, just before a tense Presidential election.

This has never been a secret in these negotiations. At the first round of talks in Kazakhstan in February, Iran's chief nuclear negotiator, Saeed Jalili, concisely set out that symbol:

Every proposal that is tabled --- to build transparency or to build confidence --- should be based on the rights of the IRI [Islamic Republic of Iran], the IRI's nuclear rights including the right to enrich uranium. It is in this context that the issues may be negotiated.

At home, the nuclear programme has become an important part of Iran's "self-sufficiency Jihad". A military concept that began during the "Holy Defense", the Islamic Republic's term for the 1980s Iran-Iraq War, this has expanded into areas of science and more recently, in the wake of sanctions, into the economy.

Central to the narrative, defying the economic facts on the ground, is the concept that sanctions have only served to make Iran stronger. The Supreme Leader has framed this as the "resistance economy", promoted by Jalili after the February talks:

We saw that these pressures and behaviors have not only borne any results for them but have strengthened our determination to continue on our path; therefore the best way is to correct this strategy and to set out on a new path.

Linked with "resistance" is the idea that the Islamic Republic is the leader of the global Islamic revolution, using its indigenous resources to master nuclear science. Sanctions are the means by which the West is attempting to prevent this Iranian mastery.

Pursuing this "self-sufficiency Jihad", the Revolutionary Guards have absorbed one of the most powerful and emotional Holy Defense symbols --- that of the Revolutionary Martyr -- into the narrative of the nuclear programme.

In November, on the anniversary of the assassination of nuclear scientist Mostafa Ahmadi-Roshan, Fars News --- close to the Guards --- published an interview with Ahmadi-Roshan's widow Fatima:

The nuclear martyrs knew very well why the sanctions were imposed, and the martyr Ahmadi-Roshan was able to provide everything for the Natanz facility and knowingly provided the requirements of the site.

These concepts are not only promoted by the military and Guards In an interview last year with Qatar's al-Watan newspaper, Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi declared:

Let them [the West] say what they like… Iran has now become one of the few countries in the world that has overcome all technical constraints in the nuclear field…Iran does not need a nuclear bomb but we now have nuclear technology in all areas.

In an analysis on EA in December, Nicholas J. Wheeler, Josh Baker, and Scott Lucas summarised:

If the Obama Administration simply repackages the "Stop, Shut, and Ship" proposal, then the stalemate will continue....Waiting on Iran to make the first move before offering anything more significant...risks poisoning still further the relationship between the West and Iran.

This morning, we are on the verge of that poisoning. Western diplomats will likely pin blame on Iranian intransigence. There will be declarations that the failure to reach agreement means that the "West" must pursue yet more sanctions. Some voices will resurrect the supposed need for military action.

Almost none of those commentaries will stop to consider that there may be a reason beyond malice for Iran's position this week --- that the Islamic Republic cannot give up the right to enrichment without giving up part of its identity.