Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Under Diplomatic Fire on the Brink of Collapse
Iran’s Nuclear Facilities Under Diplomatic Fire on the Brink of Collapse
As Iran’s nuclear dossier stands on the brink of a historic decision and security and diplomatic tensions have reached their highest level since the collapse of the JCPOA, the new meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna has turned into a new battleground for conflicting viewpoints. Meanwhile, the activation of the snapback mechanism by the European trio, unprecedented military attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the withdrawal of agency inspectors, and speculations about the return of UN sanctions have all darkened the diplomatic outlook more than ever.
IranGate in this special report examines the latest developments and behind-the-scenes negotiations in Vienna, Doha, and New York. What is happening in the decision-making path regarding the fate of Iran’s nuclear program – from Moscow’s proposals to Tehran’s diplomatic isolation, from unprepared resolutions to the remaining fragile opportunities – in this dense atmosphere of threat, pressure, and strategic calculations, a key question arises: Will November mark the end of diplomacy or the beginning of a new phase to resolve one of the most complex global political cases?
Return of Tension to Vienna, Snapback Mechanism, Shadow of War, and Diplomatic Opportunities
Vienna – the city once again hosting high-level representatives of countries for the seasonal meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors.
This round of meetings is held just two weeks after Germany, the UK, and France – the three European countries party to the nuclear agreement known as the JCPOA – informed the UN Security Council of their decision to activate the snapback mechanism.
In the previous meeting, a resolution was issued against Iran, accusing the country of insufficient cooperation with the agency and failing to fulfill its safeguards commitments. The resolution warned that if this situation continued, Iran’s case would be referred to the Security Council.
However, one of the senior European representatives in Vienna has emphasized that the European trio does not intend to propose a new resolution against Iran in this meeting, and the issue of referring the case is currently off the agenda.
Consequences of a Resolution: From War to Suspension of Cooperation
Only a day after the previous resolution was issued, Israel targeted Iran’s territory and its nuclear facilities. The US joined these attacks less than ten days later, bombing some sensitive nuclear facilities.
These attacks not only transformed the field situation of Iran’s nuclear program but also led to the withdrawal of agency inspectors from Iran, initially based on the agency’s decision to ensure inspectors’ safety during the conflict and then based on Tehran’s decision to suspend cooperation with this international body.
During this period, inspectors returned to Iran only once to conduct some technical examinations, including at the Bushehr plant, but they were not allowed access to the sites that had been attacked.
Reports also indicate that the dispatched inspectors during this period were all Russian nationals, a matter that, despite the agency’s emphasis on the complete neutrality of its forces, has drawn criticism.
Europe’s Realism Regarding Iran
The three European countries still believe that Iran must return to its commitments to the agency, but some diplomats acknowledge that in the post-war atmosphere, with political and economic unrest, expecting Tehran to fully meet the demands in the short term is not realistic.
According to one senior European diplomat, the goal of not immediately referring the case to the Security Council is to create breathing space for a political solution.
However, some countries insist on the quick return of inspectors to Iran, especially considering that some of Iran’s nuclear sites were not damaged in the recent attacks.
Simultaneously, some senior representatives warn that the apparent sympathy of some capitals with the attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities raises fundamental questions about the legitimacy of such actions at the international level.
Tehran is also trying to garner diplomatic support in Vienna and New York by leveraging these questions.
Countdown to Snapback Mechanism Activation
On August 28, the European trio officially began the process of activating the snapback mechanism. This action followed Tehran’s rejection of Europe’s proposal, which offered Iran six months to cooperate with the agency, return to talks with the US, and clarify its enriched uranium reserves. In return, the activation of the snapback mechanism would be delayed.
However, Tehran described this proposal as unbalanced and maximalist, especially given that part of the country’s nuclear infrastructure had been destroyed in Israeli and US attacks.
Now, less than 15 days remain until the deadline. If there is no progress, international sanctions and Security Council resolutions against Iran will return. The European trio has announced that they will extend these sanctions to their domestic laws as well.
Moscow’s Option and Secret Negotiations
In recent weeks, Russia has prepared a draft resolution that, unlike Europe’s proposal, sets almost no preconditions for Iran.
This text has not yet been put to a vote, and according to diplomatic sources, it has little chance of securing 9 positive votes in the Security Council. Even if approved, the threat of a veto from some members remains.
Tehran is also trying to align Beijing to support this draft. Informed sources about internal negotiations in Iran have reported that some legislative bodies are attempting to have Iran’s enrichment rights recognized based on this resolution, and in return, the activation of the snapback mechanism would be delayed for five years. European diplomats have described this proposal as unacceptable.
Intensive Negotiations for a New Framework
In recent days, talks have been held between senior Iranian officials, the EU’s foreign policy chief, and the IAEA director-general in Doha and Vienna. Some sources have reported limited progress, but many questions remain unanswered, including whether these advances are sufficient to save diplomacy.
Europeans emphasize that the return of sanctions will not be the end of the diplomatic path but could be the starting point for pressure to bring Tehran back to the negotiating table. However, there are also concerns in Europe that if the snapback mechanism is activated and proves ineffective, the last serious card of diplomacy might be lost.
Iran’s Proposed Resolution at the IAEA General Conference
Diplomatic sources have reported that Iran, with possible Russian support, has prepared a draft resolution regarding attacks on its nuclear facilities and presented it to some countries. This draft has not yet been officially provided to the Europeans, but they have seen the text and assessed it as unilateral and beyond the agency’s authority.
The US strongly opposes this draft and has warned that its approval could lead to restrictions on Israel’s activities in the agency or even cut US funding for this international body.
Deep Division in the P5+1 and a Dark Outlook
Unlike in 2015, the P5+1 no longer has the same cohesion. China and Russia, alongside Iran, propose a different path, while Europe sees direct dialogue between Iran and the US as the only real way.
Tehran seeks guarantees against future attacks, but Europe says the only real guarantee is a return to the agreement under the agency’s supervision.
Although the Board of Governors will not issue a new resolution against Iran in this round, a harsh statement against Tehran may be released.
The non-compliance resolution against Iran, passed in June, remains on the table and could be activated in the November meeting, which many observers see as a pivotal and eventful moment in the nuclear diplomacy calendar.
Minimal Steps, Limited Opportunities
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which derailed seven years ago, is now on the brink. Parties have put specific solutions on the table: 1. Full resumption of Iran’s cooperation with the agency
2. Return of inspectors to routine activities
3. Clarification of the status of highly enriched uranium
4. Resumption of direct talks with the US
But is there enough time left?
Iran, still in shock from extensive military attacks, under unprecedented economic sanctions, and in a politically unstable domestic environment, faces a very challenging outlook.
On the other hand, Europe, with deep doubts about the effectiveness of further pressures, while wanting to maintain cohesion against what it calls the increasing threat of nuclear proliferation, is trying to turn the little remaining time into an opportunity to break the deadlock.
The war in Gaza, insecurity in the Persian Gulf, and financial and institutional challenges within the IAEA, which faces a budget deficit of about 120 million euros, all add to the complexity of the situation.
The suspension of inspectors’ presence in Iran and the halting of some monitoring mechanisms have increased concerns and severely eroded mutual trust.
In such an environment, November is not just another month in the diplomatic calendar but, as many diplomats present in Vienna put it, could be a decisive month: 1. The beginning of the return of sanctions or the formation of the last possible agreement
2. Full activation of the snapback mechanism or the opening of a window for negotiation
Perhaps, as Henry Kissinger said, the absence of an alternative solution directs minds towards the only possible option, which, although not desirable to any party, is more bearable in terms of cost and consequences than the path of complete confrontation.
In the coming days, eyes will turn to Vienna and then New York, where decisions will be made not only about the future of Iran’s nuclear dossier but also about the credibility of international mechanisms in maintaining security and preventing nuclear proliferation.