Despite Iran’s nuclear program being a major topic of media discussion and coverage for decades, there remain a lot of core misunderstandings about how a nuclear program works, and what is an important metric.
This brings IAEA chief Rafael Grossi’s comments on Iran’s uranium enrichment into focus, which in the context of this confusion are wildly misleading, to the point where they almost seem deliberately designed to trick people into jumping to the wrong conclusions about Iran’s civilian enrichment program.
Grossi claimed in his latest comments that Iran’s enrichment is at levels which are equally only by “countries making bombs.” This gives the impression that Iran is in the process of making arms, despite important distinctions, chief of which is that Iran is not even attempting to make any arms.
It is not inaccurate to say that no nations other than nuclear powers are enriching over 60%, but that is meaningless without the accompanying caveats and explanations. It is needlessly accusatory toward Iran, and misleading to everyone who is not educated on the aspects of nuclear physics.
Legally, Iran has every right in the world to enrich uranium for civilian uses. Iran has agreed not to enrich to weapons-grade, which is in excess of 90%. Iran has never made any effort to enrich that high.
The 60% enrichment may be troubling to Grossi, but is readily explained. Iran has no civilian use for 60% enrichment, or anything above 20%. The only reason they recent went beyond 20% was recent Israeli sabotage, with Iran’s parliament ordering the move as a protest. The enrichment is still well short of weapons-grade, and since they have no direct use for 60%, it is likely Iran will simply dilute the uranium back down to usable levels in time.
Even then, the 60% uranium enrichment is not a direct proliferation threat, and Grossi’s claims that Iran cannot roll back its program not only further mislead the public, but are flat out incorrect.
Grossi’s meaning in that comment is that Iran knowing how to enrich to 60% as a practical matter can’t be undone, but Iran absolutely can return its enrichment program to a much lower level, and dilute anything beyond what is needed. In every way that matters they can undo the escalation of the program.
That’s kind of the point. Iran took the enrichment beyond what they were doing to protest the lack of sanctions relief they were promised, and then again to protest Israel’s sabotage of their program. They did so while being clear everything was reversible as soon as a deal was made.
Rhetoric aside, Iran’s enrichment remains purely civilian in nature, and the only thing that’s really changed is the view of the IAEA chief, whose statements clearly need to be taken with a grain of salt.
As a practical matter, another option for Iran is to continue to enrich Uranium to high levels. Such near-bomb-level stockpiles, if carefully hidden, would represent a deterrent to the Apartheid state and others who might consider doing some “nuclear bullying”.