Richard Nephew, Program Director, Economic Statecraft, Sanctions and Energy Markets, Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University, writes for the Columbia Center on Global Energy Policy that while Iran has taken steps to fulfill its commitments under the JCPOA, internal Iranian politics, especially as all sides in the Iranian factional system consider the February elections for the Majles, will probably slow down adoption of the agreement. He notes, however, that for the United States, delays in implementation are ultimately less important so long as the final measures of the agreement are all completed.Read more about Predicting When New Iranian Oil Will Begin to Flow
Members of the Iranian Parliament Discussing the Nuclear Agreement with the West (AP Images)
By Henry Rome
Members of the Iranian parliament (Majles) passed legislation on Oct. 13 approving the implementation of the nuclear deal reached between Iran and the West, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The legislation passed with 161 lawmakers in support, 59 opposed, and 13 abstentions. It was subsequently ratified by the Guardian Council, which vets all Majles legislation, and approved by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.
The bill was published only in Farsi; Iran Matters’ original English translation is below.
Trevor Findlay, Associate with the Project on Managing the Atom at the Belfer Center, provides the first comprehensive study of the International Atomic Energy Agency's handling of states that are not complying with their non-proliferation obligations.
The report finds that none of the cases—which include North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Libya, and Syria, among others—have followed the non-compliance process outlined in the Agency's Statute and safeguards agreements. Rather, each case has posed unique challenges to the non-proliferation regime. The report concludes that creativity and deft statecraft rather than a rigid, formulaic approach are key to the handling of complex non-compliance cases.
In addition to flexibility, the report emphasizes the importance of protecting the impartiality and enhancing the technical capabilities of the Agency's Secretariat and the need for the Board of Governors to assume full responsibility for making non-compliance judgments. It also calls for greater transparency from the Agency and its member states about compliance with safeguards.
Avner Golov, Researcher at the Center for a New American Security and Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies, argues that now that the Iran nuclear deal has begun to be implemented, the United States should take measures to fill in the gaps in the agreement. Specifically, he advocates that the US develop additional snapback provisions to deter an Iranian attempt to build a bomb later in the agreement while increasing intelligence cooperation in the region to monitor Iran's program, revitalize partnerships with Arab Sunni states through military support and cooperation to help them check Iran's regional advances, and reinvigorate high level cooperation with Israel.
Gary Samore, Director of Research at the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, and Ephraim Kam, Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, examine the fate of the military option in the process of the Iranian nuclear talks. They discuss how from the beginning, American and Israeli understandings of the use and effectiveness of the military option against the Iranian program, and that while the United States sought to diminish the likelihood of a military attack during the negotiations, Israeli officials accused the US of diminishing the credibility of a potential military attack. While they recommend that the military option be strengthened going forward, considering the continued possibility that Iran will renege on its commitments and potentially try to construct a nuclear weapon, they recognize that many factors will influence whether or not the military option is employed against the Iranian nuclear program going into the future. Read more about What Happened to the Military Option Against Iran?
Aaron Arnold, Associate with the Project on Managing the Atom at the Belfer Center, and Nikos Passas, Professor of Criminal Justice at Northeastern University, argue in The Conversation that Iran's reintegration into the global financial system may in fact make it easier, not more difficult, to monitor Iranian financial activities for illicit transactions. They point to the fact that banks can monitor transactions for entities designated as involved in terrorist or weapons of mass destruction activities by the U.S. Treasury. They also suggest that Iran may adopt stricter money laundering standards in order to increase economic integration. While challenges remain, they suggest that building a public-private partnership between banks and regulators will ensure that Iran will be caught in any illicit financial actions after the nuclear deal. Read more about Banks Will Help Ensure Iran Keeps Promises On Nukes
Ephraim Asculai, Senior Research Fellow at the the Institute for National Security Studies, and Emily Landau, Senior Research Associate at INSS, argue that while the Iran nuclear agreement is being implemented, there are still significant flaws that need to be remedied in the implementation phase to ensure the agreement functions. They suggest meticulous verification mechanisms to monitor Iranian compliance, transparency in the verification regime, professional oversight and analysis of the IAEA's verification techniques, timely reporting, and verifying and checking information provided by member states to the IAEA as ways to ensure that Iran does not cheat on the agreement and is held to its commitments. Read more about The Details of the Iran Deal Matter, Now More Than Ever