Iran Activates Centrifuges After IAEA Rebuke

December 2024
By Kelsey Davenport

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Board of Governors censured Iran for failing to cooperate with the agency, despite Tehran signaling it would freeze its stockpile of uranium enriched to near-weapons-grade levels.

The censure was introduced by France, Germany, the United Kingdom, and the United States after IAEA Director-General Rafael Mariano Grossi reported that Iran did not provide any information to resolve a years-long investigation into the presence of undeclared nuclear materials at two sites that are not part of the country’s nuclear program.

Grossi did report that the agency verified on Nov. 16 that the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) took initial steps to halt the accumulation of uranium enriched to 60 percent U-235, a level just shy of the 90 percent U-235 considered weapons-grade.

Grossi said during a Nov. 20 press conference that he proposed that Tehran take this step during a Nov. 14-15 trip to Iran.

He also observed an “intense disposition” for engagement by Iranian officials during his trip, which included meetings with Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian and Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi.

Although Grossi described Iran’s commitments during the trip as “important,” the progress was not enough to prevent the Europeans and the United States from moving forward with the resolution, which passed Nov. 21 by a vote of 19-3, with 12 abstentions. The censure marks the fourth time that the board has used a resolution to push Iran to provide the agency with technically credible explanations for uranium detected at undeclared locations in 2020 and 2021. (See ACT, July/August 2024.)

Similar to the previous three resolutions, Russia and China opposed the measure.

Prior to the vote, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharib Abadi told journalists that Iran would “respond decisively and immediately” to a resolution. Following the vote, the Iranian Foreign Ministry and the AEOI issued a statement ordering the “activation” of “various types” of advanced centrifuges.

The statement did not provide specifics, but a IAEA report on Nov. 19 regarding Iran’s nuclear program noted that Iran has IR-2 centrifuges at its Natanz uranium-enrichment facility and IR-6 centrifuges at its Fordow uranium-enrichment facility that are not currently operating. The IR-2 and IR-6 centrifuges enrich uranium more efficiently. The AEOI order to “activate” additional centrifuges likely referred to introducing uranium into those machines.

The statement did not mention if Iran would reverse its commitment to halt the accumulation of uranium enriched to 60 percent U-235.

Grossi told reporters that there was “no conditionality” regarding the proposal on 60 percent U-235 enrichment, but Iranian officials suggested that the country would reverse the decision if the board passed the censure.

The Europeans and the United States consistently have raised concerns about Iran’s enrichment of uranium to 60 percent U-235, given how quickly the material can be enriched to weapons grade. But it is not mentioned in the resolution, which focuses on safeguards issues.

In the Nov. 21 resolution, the board “reaffirms its decision that it is essential and urgent” for Iran to provide “technically credible explanations” for the presence of uranium at Varamin and Turquzabad.

During his trip, Grossi discussed “possible elements” to resolve the agency’s questions about undeclared nuclear materials detected at Varamin, a site where the IAEA assesses that Iran undertook uranium-milling and -conversion activities that were not declared to the agency. The IAEA “will continue to work with Iran towards making substantive progress” on this issue, the Nov. 19 report said.

The Europeans and the United States did not view the discussions as tangible progress. In a Nov. 21 joint statement, they said that there has been “no progress” on the safeguards investigation since June. The statement noted that the resolution passed by the board in June said that Tehran needed to provide “full and unambiguous cooperation with the agency to resolve all outstanding safeguards issues” or face further action.

The Nov. 2 resolution also requests that Grossi provide a “comprehensive and updated assessment” regarding the undeclared nuclear materials in connection with “past and present outstanding issues regarding Iran’s nuclear program” by March 2025.

Grossi has suggested that such a report is not necessary. During the board meeting in September, he said at a press conference that the IAEA already has provided an assessment of what occurred at the sites where undeclared uranium was detected. (See ACT, October 2024.)

The Europeans and the United States said that the requested comprehensive report will allow the board to “consider whether further steps are needed.”

Iran, joined by eight other states including China and Russia, said in a Nov. 21 statement that the resolution demonstrated an “unconstructive and confrontational approach” and “undermines ongoing” engagement. 
The board’s priority should be to “strongly encourage and support” engagement between the IAEA and Iran, the statement said.

After the resolution passed, the Europeans and the United States welcomed the vote and expressed hope that Iran will “take the opportunity” to resolve the outstanding issues before the comprehensive report is completed so that the board can “close consideration” of the matter.

Despite the contentious meeting, Iranian officials and representatives of the three European countries met in Geneva on Nov. 29 to discuss a range of issues, including Iran’s nuclear program. The United States did not participate in the talks, but that could change after U.S. President-elect Donald Trump takes office in January. During his campaign, Trump said the United States “has to make a deal” with Iran.

Despite Trump’s withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal in May 2018, Pezeshkian suggested on Nov. 12 that Iran is willing to engage the Trump administration. Iran will “have to deal” with the United States, and it is better for Tehran to “handle the relationship,” he said.

Pezeshkian’s support for nuclear diplomacy comes amid continued calls by high-level Israeli officials to strike Iran’s nuclear program.

Israeli Defense Minister Israel Katz said on Nov. 11 that Iran is “more exposed than ever to damage to its nuclear facilities” and that Israel has the chance to “remove the threat” posed by the nuclear program.