Tag Archives: Iran Nuclear Deal

Defense Secretary Mattis suggests sticking with Iran nuclear deal

U.S. Secretary of Defense James Mattis testifies before a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on the "Political and Security Situation in Afghanistan" on Capitol Hill in Washington, U.S., October 3, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

By Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on Tuesday the United States should consider staying in the Iran nuclear deal unless it were proven that Tehran was not abiding by the agreement or that it was not in the U.S. national interest to do so.

Although Mattis said he supported President Donald Trump’s review of the agreement curbing Iran’s nuclear program, the defense secretary’s view was far more positive than that of Trump, who has called the deal agreed between Iran and six world powers in 2015 an “embarrassment.”

Trump is weighing whether the pact serves U.S. security interests as he faces an Oct. 15 deadline for certifying that Iran is complying, a decision that could sink an agreement strongly supported by the other world powers that negotiated it.

“If we can confirm that Iran is living by the agreement, if we can determine that this is in our best interest, then clearly we should stay with it,” Mattis told a Senate hearing.

“I believe …, absent indications to the contrary, it is something that the president should consider staying with,” Mattis added.

Earlier, when Mattis was asked whether he thought staying in the deal was in the U.S. national security interest, he replied: “Yes, senator, I do.”

The White House had no immediate comment on Mattis’ remarks, which once again highlighted the range of views on major policy issues within the Trump administration.

If Trump does not recertify by Oct. 15 that Iran is in compliance, congressional leaders would have 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions on Tehran suspended under the accord.

That would let Congress, controlled by Trump’s fellow Republicans, effectively decide whether to kill the deal. Although congressional leaders have declined to say whether they would seek to reimpose sanctions, Republican lawmakers were united in their opposition to the agreement reached by Democratic former President Barack Obama.

Senator Tom Cotton, a long-time skeptic about the Iran deal, backed decertification in order to threaten Iran with more sanctions or military action.

“One thing I learned in the Army is that when you have your opponent on his knees, you drive him to the ground and choke him out,” Cotton said in a speech on Tuesday to the Council on Foreign Relations in Washington.

‘FUNDAMENTALLY’ IN COMPLIANCE

In a House of Representatives hearing on Tuesday, Mattis said Iran was “fundamentally” in compliance with the nuclear deal.

“There have been certainly some areas where they were not temporarily in that regard, but overall our intelligence community believes that they have been compliant and the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) also says so,” Mattis said.

Last month, Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani said the accord cannot be renegotiated.

Trump has said he has made a decision on what to do about the agreement but has not said what he has decided.

The prospect of Washington reneging on the agreement has worried some U.S. partners that helped negotiate it, especially as the world grapples with North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile development.

Backers of the pact say its collapse could trigger a regional arms race, worsen Middle East tensions and discourage countries like North Korea from trusting Washington to keep its word.

The deal was signed by Britain, China, the European Union, France, Germany, Iran, Russia and the United States.

White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster has defended Trump’s criticism of the nuclear agreement, saying it had the “fatal flaw” of a “sunset clause,” under which some restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program expire from 2025.

European ambassadors speaking in Washington last week said they would do everything possible to protect companies based in Europe and that continue to do business with Iran from reimposed U.S. sanctions.

French Ambassador Gerard Araud noted that the other countries that signed the pact had made clear they do not support renegotiating it.

J Street, a liberal pro-Israel group, said Trump did not have legitimate grounds to decertify the deal.

“If he chooses to do so anyway, he will be acting purely based on divisive politics and dangerous ideology, and endangering the security of the U.S. and our allies,” Dylan Williams, vice president of government affairs for the group, said in a statement.

(Reporting by Idrees Ali and Phil Stewart in Washington; Additional reporting by Steve Holland and Patricia Zengerle; Editing by Yara Bayoumy and James Dalgleish)

U.S. envoy slams Russia for bid to shield Iran from IAEA inspections

The flag of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) flies in front of their headquarters during the General Conference in Vienna, Austria September 18, 2017. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley on Thursday slammed a bid by Russia to shield Iran from inspections by the United Nations nuclear watchdog relating to a specific section of a landmark 2015 deal restricting Tehran’s nuclear activities.

Iran agreed to the nuclear deal with six major powers in exchange for the lifting of sanctions. Compliance with the nuclear restrictions is being verified by the Vienna-based International Atomic Energy Agency.

Haley has infuriated Iran by saying the IAEA should widen inspections to include military sites, but diplomats say Russia has been trying to restrict the agency’s role by arguing it has no authority to police a broadly worded section of the deal.

“If the Iran nuclear deal is to have any meaning, the parties must have a common understanding of its terms,” Haley said in a statement. “It appears that some countries are attempting to shield Iran from even more inspections. Without inspections, the Iran deal is an empty promise.”

Haley issued the statement in response to IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano telling Reuters that major powers needed to clarify the disputed section of the deal, which relates to technology that could be used to develop an atom bomb.[nL8N1M74EJ]

That section bans “activities which could contribute to the development of a nuclear explosive device.” It lists examples such as using computer models that simulate a nuclear bomb, or designing multi-point, explosive detonation systems.

Unlike many other parts of the deal, the provision, known as Section T, makes no mention of the IAEA or specifics of how it will be verified. Russia says that means the IAEA has no authority over it. Western powers and the agency disagree.

U.S. President Donald Trump has called the Iran nuclear deal – reached by predecessor Barack Obama – “an embarrassment to the United States.”

Trump has hinted that he may not recertify the agreement when it comes up for review by a mid-October deadline, in which case the U.S. Congress would have 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions waived under the accord, known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols and Francois Murphy; Editing by Bernadette Baum)

Iran will drop nuclear deal if U.S. withdraws, foreign minister tells al Jazeera

A staff member removes the Iranian flag from the stage after a group picture with foreign ministers and representatives of the U.S., Iran, China, Russia, Britain, Germany, France and the European Union during the Iran nuclear talks at the Vienna International Center in Vienna, Austria July 14, 2015. REUTERS/Carlos Barria/File Photo

ANKARA (Reuters) – Iran will abandon the nuclear deal it reached with six major powers if the United States decides to withdraw from it, its foreign minister told Qatar’s al Jazeera TV in New York.

U.S. President Donald Trump has called the 2015 deal an “embarrassment”. The deal is supported by the other major powers that negotiated it with Iran and its collapse could trigger a regional arms race and worsen tensions in the Middle East.

“If Washington decides to pull out of the nuclear deal, Iran will withdraw too,” Al Jazeera TV wrote on its Twitter feed, quoting the minister.

“Washington will be in a better position if it remains committed to the deal,” the network wrote.

Trump is considering whether the accord serves U.S. security interests. He faces a mid-October deadline for certifying that Iran is complying with the pact.

A State Department official said Washington would not comment on every statement by an Iranian official.

“We are fully committed to addressing the totality of Iranian threats and malign activities,” the official said.

Iranian authorities had repeatedly said Tehran would not be the first to violate the agreement, under which Tehran agreed to restrict its nuclear program in return for lifting most international sanctions that had crippled its economy.

The prospect that Washington could renege on the deal has worried some of the U.S. allies that helped negotiate it. French President Emmanuel Macron said last week that there was no alternative to the nuclear accord.

If Trump, who has called the accord “the worst deal ever negotiated”, does not recertify it by Oct. 16, Congress has 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions suspended under the accord.

(Writing by Parisa Hafezim; Editing by Matthew Mpoke Bigg)

IAEA chief calls for clarity on disputed section of Iran nuclear deal

International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Yukiya Amano reacts during an interview with Reuters at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria September 26, 2017. REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger

By Francois Murphy

neVIENNA (Reuters) – The U.N. nuclear watchdog’s chief urged major powers on Tuesday to clarify a part of their nuclear deal with Iran dealing with technology that could be used to develop an atom bomb, an area Russia said the agency should leave alone.

The 2015 pact between six major powers and Iran restricts its nuclear activities in exchange for the lifting of sanctions against the Islamic Republic. Compliance with those curbs is being verified by the International Atomic Energy Agency.

IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano has defended the deal as a major step forward while declining to comment specifically on criticism of it by the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump, who has called the accord – reached by predecessor Barack Obama – “an embarrassment to the United States”.

But while Nikki Haley, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, has infuriated Tehran by saying the IAEA should widen its inspections to include military sites, diplomats say Russia has been trying to restrict the agency’s role by arguing it has no authority to police a broadly worded section of the deal.

That section bans “activities which could contribute to the development of a nuclear explosive device”. It lists examples such as using computer models that simulate a nuclear bomb, or designing multi-point, explosive detonation systems.

Unlike many other parts of the deal, the provision, known as Section T, makes no mention of the IAEA or specifics of how it will be verified. Russia says that means the IAEA has no authority over it. Western powers and the agency disagree.

“Our tools are limited,” Amano told Reuters when asked if his agency had the means to verify Section T.

“In other sections, for example, Iran has committed to submit declarations, place their activities under safeguards or ensure access by us. But in Section T I don’t see any (such commitment).”

Amano said he hoped the parties to the agreement would discuss the issue in the Joint Commission, a forum created by the deal, adding that even a clearer definition of terms such as the technology referred to would be an improvement.

“More clarification would be helpful … Russia has a different view. They believe that it is not the mandate of the IAEA. Others have different views and discussions are ongoing.”

DIPLOMACY

Trump has hinted that he may not recertify the agreement when it comes up for review by a mid-October deadline, in which case the U.S. Congress would have 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions waived under the accord, known officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Amano repeated, however, that Iran was implementing its nuclear commitments under the deal. He said complementary access – often consisting of short-notice inspections carried out under the IAEA Additional Protocol, which Iran is implementing under the accord – was going smoothly.

“Complementary access in Iran is being undertaken without problem and the number of accesses is quite high,” he said.

When asked if a successful Iran deal could help encourage a political solution in nuclear-armed North Korea, to which the IAEA has no access, Amano said the two situations were quite different. But he added: “I also do not say that there’s no comparison, because in the JCPOA’s case, diplomacy worked.”

(Editing by Mark Heinrich)

European ambassadors to U.S. back Iran nuclear pact

FILE PHOTO - German Ambassador to the United Nations Peter Wittig speaks to the media after a U.N. Security Council meeting in New York February 4, 2012. REUTERS/Allison Joyce

By Patricia Zengerle

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The ambassadors to Washington from Britain, France, Germany and the European Union all strongly backed the international nuclear agreement with Iran on Monday, as long as Tehran continues to comply with the pact.

U.S. President Donald Trump is weighing whether the 2015 deal serves U.S. security interests as he faces a mid-October deadline for certifying that Iran is complying with the pact, a decision that could sink an agreement strongly supported by the other world powers that negotiated it.

“We agree that the demise of this agreement would be a major loss,” David O’Sullivan, the European Union’s envoy in Washington, said at an Atlantic Council panel discussion.

German Ambassador Peter Wittig said anyone advocating walking away should consider “larger issues,” including an increased danger Iran would resume enrichment, danger of a nuclear arms race in an unstable region and impact on global nonproliferation efforts.

“What kind of signal would this send to countries like North Korea?” Wittig asked. “It would send a signal that diplomacy is not reliable, that you can’t trust diplomatic agreements, and that would affect, I believe, our credibility in the West when we’re not honoring an agreement that Iran has not violated.”

If Trump does not recertify by Oct. 16, Congress has 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions suspended under the accord.

That would let Congress, which is controlled by Trump’s fellow Republicans, effectively decide whether to kill the deal. Although congressional leaders have declined to say whether they would seek to reimpose sanctions, every Republican lawmaker opposed the deal reached by Democratic President Barack Obama’s administration.

Many, like Trump, have made opposition to the agreement a campaign issue.

If Washington pulls out of the deal, the ambassadors said they would do everything possible to protect any companies based in Europe that continue to do business with Iran from reimposed U.S. sanctions.

Britain’s ambassador, Kim Darroch, said Trump and Prime Minister Theresa May had devoted about half their discussion to Iran when they met in New York last week, although Trump did not reveal his decision.

He said May had explained again why Britain supports the nuclear pact, seeing it as a matter of national security. “As long as the Iranians continue to comply with it, in the view of the IAEA, we will continue to support it,” he said, referring to the International Atomic Energy Agency.

Speaking separately at another event in Washington, White House national security adviser H.R. McMaster defended Trump’s criticism of the deal.

“I obviously agree with the president on this, I think it was the worst deal. It gave Iran all of the benefits up front,” McMaster said, adding that it had the “fatal flaw of a ‘sunset clause’.” He was speaking at an event hosted by the Institute for the Study of War.

The so-called sunset clauses are provisions under which some of the deal’s restrictions on Iran’s nuclear program expire from 2025.

French Ambassador Gerard Araud noted that the other countries that signed the pact – Russia, China and Iran – had made clear that they do not support renegotiating.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle Additional reporting by Phil Stewart; Editing by Lisa Shumaker and James Dalgleish)

Defying Trump, Iran says will boost missile capabilities

Defying Trump, Iran says will boost missile capabilities

By Bozorgmehr Sharafedin

LONDON (Reuters) – Iran will strengthen its missile capabilities and will not seek any country’s permission, President Hassan Rouhani said on Friday in a snub to demands from U.S. President Donald Trump.

Rouhani was speaking at a military parade where an Iranian news agency said one of the weapons on display was a new ballistic missile with range of 2,000 km (1,200 miles), capable of carrying several warheads.

The Tasnim news agency, which quoted the head of the Revolutionary Guards’ aerospace division, Amirali Hajizadeh, gave few other details of the missile.

At the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, Trump said Iran was building its missile capability and accused it exporting violence to Yemen, Syria and other parts of the Middle East.

He also criticized the 2015 pact that the United States and six other powers struck with Iran under which Tehran agreed to restrict its nuclear program in return for relief from economic sanctions.

In a speech broadcast on state television, Rouhani said: “We will increase our military power as a deterrent. We will strengthen our missile capabilities … We will not seek permission from anyone to defend our country.

“All countries in the world supported the nuclear deal in the United Nations General Assembly this year … except the United States and the Zionist regime (Israel),” Rouhani said.

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has said that the agreement must be changed or the United States could not stick with it. Iran has said its nuclear accord cannot be renegotiated.

The prospect of Washington reneging on the deal has worried some of the U.S. allies that helped negotiate it, especially as the world grapples with North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile development.

Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said tensions on the Korean peninsula underlined the importance of the Iranian deal, and that China would continue to support it.

Trump put Iran “on notice” in February for test-firing a ballistic missile and imposed new economic sanctions in July over its missile program and “malign activities” in the Middle East.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that the U.S. imposition of unilateral sanctions on Iran was “illegitimate and undermines the collective nature of international efforts.”

(Reporting by Bozorgmehr Sharafedin; Editing by Robin Pomeroy)

Iran says it will not be the first to violate nuclear deal

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani addresses the 72nd United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, U.S., September 20, 2017. REUTERS/Eduardo Munoz

By Parisa Hafezi and Yara Bayoumy

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) – Iran vowed on Wednesday not to be the first nation to violate the 2015 Iran nuclear deal.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he had made up his mind whether to abandon the accord but declined to disclose his decision.

Speaking at the U.N. General Assembly of world leaders, Iranian President Hassan Rouhani responded forcefully to Trump’s pugnacious speech on Tuesday by saying Iran would not be pushed around by a relative newcomer to the world stage.

But he also said Iran desired to preserve its accord with six world powers under which Tehran agreed to restrict its nuclear program for at least a decade in return for the loosening of economic sanctions that crippled its economy.

“I declare before you that the Islamic Republic of Iran will not be the first country to violate the agreement,” Rouhani said, adding that Iran would respond “decisively and resolutely” to a violation by any party.

“It will be a great pity if this agreement were to be destroyed by ‘rogue’ newcomers to the world of politics: the world will have lost a great opportunity,” he said in a dig at Trump, who on Tuesday called Iran a “rogue” state.

Trump, a businessman and former reality TV star whose first elected office is the presidency, told reporters, “I have decided,” when asked if he had made up his mind after having criticized the accord in his own U.N. speech on Tuesday.

But he declined to say what he decided.

In Tuesday’s speech Trump assailed the accord as “an embarrassment” and accused Iran of exporting “violence, bloodshed and chaos.”

U.S. officials have sent mixed signals about the nuclear agreement Iran hammered out with six major powers – Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States.

On Wednesday, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley said Trump’s speech signaled his unhappiness but not a decision to abandon the accord.

“It’s not a clear signal that he plans to withdraw. What it is, is a clear signal that he’s not happy with the deal,” Haley told CBS News in an interview.

The Republican president hinted on Tuesday that he may not recertify the pact, negotiated by his Democratic predecessor, Barack Obama. “I don’t think you’ve heard the last of it,” he said.

Trump must decide by Oct. 15 whether to certify that Iran is complying with the pact, a decision that could sink the deal. If he does not, the U.S. Congress has 60 days to decide whether to reimpose sanctions waived under the accord.

‘MORE PAINFUL RESPONSES’

Clues to the U.S. stance might emerge on Wednesday when the seven parties to the agreement are to meet, marking the first time U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif are to meet in the same room.

The head of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards earlier said the United States should experience “painful responses” following Trump’s harsh criticism.

The prospect of Washington reneging on the agreement has worried some U.S. partners that helped negotiate it, especially as the world grapples with another nuclear crisis, North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile development.

French President Emmanuel Macron said it would be a mistake to pull out of the pact. “According to me we have to keep the 2015 agreement because it was a good one,” he told reporters.

Russia is also concerned by Trump questioning the deal, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told reporters in comments published by his ministry on Wednesday.

Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir appeared to signal that his country, Iran’s major rival for regional influence, sought to see the pact strengthened, not jettisoned, and wanted Iran to scrupulously adhere to it.

“We believe that it must be strictly reinforced. Iran has not lived up to the terms of the agreement,” Jubeir told reporters. “We expect the international community to do whatever it takes to make sure Iran is in compliance with it.”

(Reporting by Yara Bayoumy, Parisa Hafezi, John Irish, Jeff Mason and Arshad Mohammed at the United Nations, Susan Heavey in Washington, Andrew Osborn in Moscow and Babak Dehghanpisheh in Beirut; Writing by Arshad Mohammed; Editing by Grant McCool)

If Trump says Iran violating nuclear deal, does not mean U.S. withdrawal: Haley

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley speaks about the Iran nuclear deal at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington, U.S., September 5, 2017. REUTERS/Aaron P. Bernstein

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – If U.S. President Donald Trump tells Congress in October that Iran is not complying with a 2015 nuclear deal it brokered with world powers, that does not mean a U.S. withdrawal from the agreement, U.S. envoy to the U.N. Nikki Haley said on Tuesday.

Under U.S. law, the State Department must notify Congress every 90 days of Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal. The next deadline is October, and Trump has said he thinks by then the United States will declare Iran to be non-compliant.

“If the President chooses not to certify Iranian compliance, that does not mean the United States is withdrawing from the JCPOA (the nuclear deal),” Haley told the American Enterprise Institute think tank in Washington.

“Should he decide to decertify he has grounds to stand on,” said Haley, adding that she did not know what Trump would decide. “We will stay in a deal as long as it protects the security of the United States.”

Most U.N. and Western sanctions were lifted 18 months ago under the nuclear deal. Iran is still subject to a U.N. arms embargo and other restrictions, which are not technically part of the deal.

In April, Trump ordered a review of whether a suspension of sanctions on Iran related to the nuclear deal, negotiated under President Barack Obama, was in the U.S. national security interest. He has called it “the worst deal ever negotiated.”

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani warned last month that Iran could abandon the nuclear agreement “within hours” if the United States imposes any more new unilateral sanctions.

“(The nuclear deal) is a very flawed and very limited agreement … Iran has been caught in multiple violations over the past year and a half,” Haley said. “The Iranian nuclear deal was designed to be too big to fail.”

The U.S. review of its policy toward Iran is also looking at Tehran’s behavior in the Middle East, which Washington has said undermines U.S. interests in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.

“Iran’s leaders want to use the nuclear deal to hold the world hostage to its bad behavior,” she said.

Haley traveled to Vienna last month to meet International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) officials for what she described as a fact-finding mission as part of Trump’s review. The IAEA polices restrictions the deal placed on Iran’s nuclear activities and reports quarterly.

While Haley asked if the IAEA planned to inspect Iranian military sites to verify Tehran’s compliance, something Tehran has said they would not allow, she said on Tuesday: “We never ask the IAEA to do anything.”

(Reporting by Michelle Nichols; Editing by James Dalgleish)

U.S. pressure or not, U.N. nuclear watchdog sees no need to check Iran military sites

FILE PHOTO: The flag of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) flies in front of IAEA's headquarters during a board of governors meeting in Vienna, Austria June 12, 2017. REUTERS/Heinz-Peter Bader

By Francois Murphy

VIENNA (Reuters) – The United States is pushing U.N. nuclear inspectors to check military sites in Iran to verify it is not breaching its nuclear deal with world powers. But for this to happen, inspectors must believe such checks are necessary and so far they do not, officials say.

Last week, U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley visited the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is scrutinizing compliance with the 2015 agreement, as part of a review of the pact by the administration of President Donald Trump. He has called it “the worst deal ever negotiated”.

After her talks with officials of the U.N. nuclear watchdog, Haley said: “There are… numerous undeclared sites that have not been inspected. That is a problem.” Iran dismissed her demands as “merely a dream”.

The IAEA has the authority to request access to facilities in Iran, including military ones, if there are new and credible indications of banned nuclear activities there, according to officials from the agency and signatories to the deal.

But they said Washington has not provided such indications to back up its pressure on the IAEA to make such a request.

“We’re not going to visit a military site like Parchin just to send a political signal,” an IAEA official said, mentioning a military site often cited by opponents of the deal including Iran’s arch-adversary Israel and many U.S. Republicans. The deal was struck under Trump’s Democratic predecessor Barack Obama.

IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano frequently describes his Vienna-based agency as a technical rather than a political one, underscoring the need for its work to be based on facts alone.

The accord restricts Iran’s atomic activities with a view to keeping the Islamic Republic a year’s work away from having enough enriched uranium or plutonium for a nuclear bomb, should it pull out of the accord and sprint towards making a weapon.

The deal also allows the IAEA to request access to facilities other than the nuclear installations Iran has already declared if it has concerns about banned materials or activities there. But it must present a basis for those concerns.

Those terms are widely understood by officials from the IAEA and member states to mean there must be credible information that arouses suspicion, and IAEA officials have made clear they will not take it at face value.

“We have to be able to vet this information,” a second IAEA official said, asking not to be identified because inspections are sensitive and the agency rarely discusses them publicly.

NO NEW INTELLIGENCE

Despite Haley’s public comments, she neither asked the IAEA to visit specific sites nor offered new intelligence on any site, officials who attended her meetings said. A U.S. State Department spokesman confirmed this.

“She conveyed that the IAEA will need to continue to robustly exercise its authorities to verify Iran’s declaration and monitor the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action,” the spokesman added, using the deal’s official name.

Under U.S. law, the State Department must notify Congress every 90 days of Iran’s compliance with the deal. The next deadline is October. Trump has said he thinks by then Washington will declare Iran to be non-compliant – a stance at odds with that of other five world powers including U.S. allies in Europe.

An IAEA report published in 2015 as part of the deal formally drew a line under whether Iran pursued nuclear weapons in the past, which is why new information is needed to trigger a request for access.

The IAEA has not visited an Iranian military facility since the agreement was implemented because it has had “no reason to ask” for access, the second agency official said.

The deal’s “Access” section lays out a process that begins with an IAEA request and, if the U.N. watchdog’s concerns are not resolved, can lead to a vote by the eight members of the deal’s decision-making body – the United States, Iran, Russia, China, France, Britain, Germany and the European Union.

Five votes are needed for a majority, which could comprise the United States and its Western allies. Such a majority decision “would advise on the necessary means to resolve the IAEA’s concerns” and Iran “would implement the necessary means”, the deal’s Access section says.

That process and wording have yet to be put to the test.

Iran has reiterated commitment to the terms of the deal despite Trump’s stance, but has also said its military sites are off limits, raising the risk of a stand-off if a request for access were put to a vote. That adds to the pressure to be clear on the grounds for an initial request.

“If they want to bring down the deal, they will,” the first IAEA official said, referring to the Trump administration. “We just don’t want to give them an excuse to.”

During its decade-long impasse with world powers over its nuclear program, Iran repeatedly refused IAEA visits to military sites, saying they had nothing to do with nuclear activity and so were beyond the IAEA’s purview.

Shortly after the 2015 deal, Iran allowed inspectors to check its Parchin military complex, where Western security services believe Tehran carried out tests relevant to nuclear bomb detonations more than a decade ago. Iran has denied this.

(Additional reporting by Shadia Nasralla; editing by Mark Heinrich)

Iran rejects U.S. demand for U.N. inspector visit to military sites

Iran rejects U.S. demand for U.N. inspector visit to military sites

ANKARA (Reuters) – Iran has dismissed a U.S. demand for U.N. nuclear inspectors to visit its military bases as “merely a dream” as Washington reviews a 2015 nuclear agreement between Tehran and six world powers, including the United States.

U.S. President Donald Trump has called the nuclear pact – negotiated under his predecessor Barack Obama – “the worst deal ever”. In April, he ordered a review of whether a suspension of nuclear sanctions on Iran was in the U.S. interest.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley, last week pressed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to seek access to Iranian military bases to ensure that they were not concealing activities banned by the nuclear deal.

“Iran’s military sites are off limits … All information about these sites are classified,” Iranian government spokesman Mohammad Baqer Nobakht told a weekly news conference broadcast on state television. “Iran will never allow such visits. Don’t pay attention to such remarks that are only a dream.”

Under U.S. law, the State Department must notify Congress every 90 days of Iran’s compliance with the nuclear deal. The next deadline is October, and Trump has said he thinks by then the United States will declare Iran to be non-compliant.

Under terms of the deal, the international nuclear watchdog can demand inspections of Iranian installations if it has concerns about nuclear materials or activities.

IAEA inspectors have certified that Iran is fully complying with the deal, under which it significantly reduced its enriched uranium stockpile and took steps to ensure no possible use of it for a nuclear weapon, in return for an end to international sanctions that had helped cripple its oil-based economy.

During its decade-long stand-off with world powers over its nuclear program, Iran repeatedly rejected visits by U.N. inspectors to its military sites, saying they had nothing to do with nuclear activity and so were beyond the IAEA’s purview.

Shortly after the deal was reached, Iran allowed inspectors to check its Parchin military complex, where Western security services believe Tehran carried out tests relevant to nuclear bomb detonations more than a decade ago. Iran has denied this.

Under the 2015 accord, Iran could not get sanctions relief until the IAEA was satisfied Tehran had answered outstanding questions about the so-called “possible military dimensions” of its past nuclear research.

Iran has placed its military bases off limits also because of what it calls the risk that IAEA findings could find their way to the intelligence services of its U.S. or Israeli foes.

“The Americans will take their dream of visiting our military and sensitive sites to their graves…It will never happen,” Ali Akbar Velayati, a top adviser to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s highest authority, told reporters.

(Writing by Parisa Hafezi; Editing by Mark Heinrich)