We were balanced on a high wire, somewhere between a momentous breakthrough and failure. Late that night, I called Salehi, promising to email him a copy of the U.S. statement. I asked him to impress on Ahmadinejad that this deal would empower both sides to change completely the terms of their dealings. I explained that according to Poneman it was too difficult for the Americans to accept bringing the Iranian material to the United States for further enrichment and fabrication. There would be too many hoops to jump through because of sanctions and domestic restrictions vis-à-vis Iran.
We spoke again early the next morning. It was now October 21, the final day of the fuel proposal meeting. Salehi was sitting with Ahmadinejad, who had another idea. He suggested that the Americans be the counterpart to the agreement but with the work subcontracted to the Russians and the French. The LEU would not need to go to the United States at all. Salehi added that he needed the Iranian team to come back to Tehran, so that he would not seem to be the only one advising the Iranian president. They would need a couple of days, he said, to provide a response.
I reconvened the meeting. I presented the proposal in the form discussed with Poneman and Soltanieh at the previous day’s meeting: Iran would ship out the full twelve hundred kilograms of LEU, and the Agency would take custody of it, with the United States giving a statement of political support. I told the participants that they had until Friday, October 23, to give their final approval. I urged them to approve it, noting the doors that would be opened by the agreement. I was of course addressing primarily Iran; the other three participants, the United States, Russia, and France, were already on board.
With the meeting concluded, I made a short, upbeat statement to the press. The U.S. delegation dropped by to express Washington’s appreciation. Obama called later in the day to thank me personally. “If this agreement is approved,” he said, “it will change the dynamics here for me.” It would give him the space needed for negotiation with Iran on many fronts. More than once, for so many reasons, I felt the need to pinch myself.
The celebrations were premature. In Tehran, attitudes within the political establishment had been hardening since the P-5+1 Geneva meeting at the beginning of the month. Critics on all sides, including the liberal faction that had recently lost the presidential election, were accusing Ahmadinejad of selling the store. Ali Larijani, who had seen his efforts to achieve a de facto suspension vetoed by Ahmadinejad, was now chairman of the Majlis. It was political payback time. He had joined the ranks of those criticizing the fuel proposal as an “insult to the nation.” Why, they asked, should Iran not be able to buy its fuel on the market like any other country?
Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert on the U.S. Council on Foreign Relations, summarized the situation eloquently: “There’s been a breakdown in the country’s foreign policy machinery. Iran doesn’t have a foreign policy right now. It has domestic politics, and its foreign policies are just a sporadic expression of that. It’s not sinister; it’s not duplicitous; it’s just incompetent.”[25]
I had just over a month left at the IAEA. I was in daily contact with Poneman in Washington and Salehi in Tehran, trying to hammer out a deal. Salehi kept floating and then retracting a number of add-on proposals to sweeten the arrangement; he was consumed with trying to find a way to sell the deal in Tehran. Eventually he came back with an answer: Ahmadinejad could agree only if the LEU remained at home until the Iranians received the research reactor fuel. They proposed storing the LEU on the island of Kish in the Persian Gulf, under IAEA custody and control. Iran would be ready to swap the material as soon as the fuel was delivered.
I began to draft an agreement to that effect, but Poneman called to say that Obama was “very uncomfortable” with any agreement that would keep the nuclear material in Iran. They were ready for any other creative solution, including making the United States the sole party to the agreement, as Salehi had earlier proposed. They also suggested storing the uranium in a third country, such as Turkey or Kazakhstan, where Iran would have complete trust in the host.
I checked in with Salehi. Unfortunately, domestic politics had once again shifted. The United States as the sole party to the agreement would no longer be sufficient. The bottom line was that the LEU had to stay physically in Iran until it was time for the swap.
We were watching the brightest of opportunities sink into the mire of domestic politics in both Washington and Tehran.
Salehi rang on November 5 to say that he had been asked by President Ahmadinejad to see Khamenei to discuss the fuel agreement. Salehi was surprised; he had expected the Iranian president to make the decision himself. The Supreme Leader told Salehi that the international treatment of Iran’s request for fuel for its research reactor was becoming an indignity. Iran, he said, would deliver the LEU as a swap, but only in batches of four hundred kilograms, and only upon receipt of the fuel.
Only days earlier, Hillary Clinton had insisted in the media that the deal would not be changed,[26] which upset the Iranians even as they acknowledged Obama’s more conciliatory and friendly statements. Salehi was dejected. Even the idea of storage at Kish Island was no longer on the table. Khamenei’s last response was “the final word.” This new condition would not fly, I told Salehi. He knew that and asked me to urge the Americans to be patient.
In an interview with Christiane Amanpour, I attempted to put subtle pressure on the Iranians, urging them to look at the big picture and suggesting the idea of Turkey as a third country where the LEU could be stationed. I called Poneman after the interview, to let him know the latest. He called back shortly thereafter to say that Obama was comfortable with Turkey and Turkish prime minister Erdoğan taking this role. Salehi meanwhile had discussed the option with Ahmadinejad, who in turn had briefed Khamenei. Through the Turkish ambassador, I sent word for Erdoğan to speak to Ahmadinejad about the idea during the latter’s upcoming trip to Turkey.
My final visit to the United States as IAEA Director General was like nothing I had experienced there in the past eight years. In Washington, I met with an exhausting lineup: James Jones, the national security adviser and his team; Hillary Clinton and her team; the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, chaired by Senator Kerry; and many other officials from the Department of Energy and the State Department. Wherever I turned, I found expressions of thanks. I had come back home to the United States I knew. It was a good conclusion.
In New York, I delivered my final address to an appreciative General Assembly. It was hard not to recall the vociferous criticisms that had not so long ago been leveled at me for partiality and the old chestnut, speaking outside of my box. But for all the sweetness and gratification of this conclusion to my tenure, the unraveling possibilities of rapprochement with Iran weighed heavily on my mind. We had come very close.
The Iranian fuel proposal did not die when I left office, continuing instead to take its twists and turns. On February 9, 2010, the Iranians declared they would begin enriching LEU up to 20 percent to provide the fuel for their research reactor. Two days later, Ahmadinejad rather inexplicably declared that Iran had become “a nuclear state.” By mid-month, IAEA inspectors verified that Iran was enriching uranium to 19.8 percent in Natanz.
But a more positive development was evolving behind the scenes. After several months’ delay, Tehran was warming to the suggestion of a fuel swap that would feature interim storage of Iran’s LEU in Turkey. In April, Obama wrote directly to Brazilian president Lula da Silva—in a letter that was later leaked to the press—urging that any fuel swap include the measure of storing the fuel “in escrow” in Turkey. I remained in occasional contact with the foreign ministers of Brazil and Turkey, fully supporting this new arrangement.
25
Doyle McManus, “Talking with Iran—and Sending a Message,”