Nuclear Iran: SA’s ‘U-turn’ criticised

South Africa’s ambivalent approach to the crisis over Iran’s nuclear programme has drawn fresh criticism, this time from the heart of the Iranian foreign policy establishment, rather than the West.

Pretoria’s decision to support a United Nations Security Council resolution that imposed new sanctions on Iran had ‘shocked” Tehran, a senior Iranian official writes in this week’s Mail & Guardian.

Javid Ghorbanoghli, a former ambassador to South Africa, is now director-general of Africa at Iran’s ministry of foreign affairs. He writes in his personal capacity, so his views cannot be construed as a formal reproach, but they clearly reflect the depth of feeling in Tehran over the vote.

‘Mr [Thabo] Mbeki, this is no way to treat a friend,” Ghorbanoghli concludes.

The security council, led in this instance by the United States, Britain and France, wants Iran to stop enriching uranium and to make its nuclear energy programme compliant with the requirements of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran has been asked to provide verifiable assurances that its programme is not intended to build a nuclear bomb.

Iran has insisted repeatedly that it is pursuing its right to nuclear energy peacefully, but the IAEA has complained that it continues to enrich uranium in defiance of the security council, and to frustrate inspections by the agency.

At the IAEA’s June 13 board of governors meeting, South Africa’s top nuclear diplomat, Abdul Minty, was unusually critical of Iran. He called on Iran to comply with UN resolutions and to cooperate with IAEA inspectors.

‘The Islamic Republic of Iran has the opportunity now to demonstrate and reassure the international community that all aspects of its nuclear programme are peaceful. South Africa calls on Iran to use every opportunity to resolve the few remaining outstanding issues with the IAEA and to restore the international community’s belief that its nuclear programme is peaceful,” he said.

Previously South African officials have placed more emphasis on Iran’s ‘inalienable right” to pursue nuclear technology for civilian purposes and suggested that any legal concerns about compliance with the nuclear non- proliferation treaty (NPT) were minimal. South Africa sought to help facilitate a deal on the issue that would help fend off action by the security council.

Ghorbanoghli describes as a ‘U-turn under Western pressure” the change that saw South Africa join the other 14 members of the security council in a unanimous yes vote on the resolution on March 24.

The resolution added an arms embargo as well as travel and financial restrictions on companies involved in the nuclear programme. Similar restrictions were imposed on companies controlled by Iran’s Revolutionary Guard.

Dumisani Khumalo, South Africa’s ambassador to the UN, had previously opposed the draft resolution. He proposed wide-ranging changes to the text, modelled in part on a suggestion from IAEA director general Mohamed El Baradei.

These included a 90-day ‘time-out” before any new measures took effect to enable more negotiations. The South African draft also blunted the sanctions considerably.

But South Africa ultimately voted for a resolution that had more minor changes — notably a reaffirmation of the IAEA’s role and support for nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.

Ghorbanoghli made it clear that Tehran saw this as a ‘U-turn under foreign pressure”. There certainly was pressure, including a phone call to Mbeki from US Secretary of State Condolleeza Rice ahead of the vote, and public criticism from other Western diplomats.

Iran’s continued defiance, of the IAEA and the UN, however, might have made support for its programme more difficult in recent months.

Minty, who sits on the IAEA board and is seen as close to El Baradei, has insisted always that South Africa takes a ‘principled” approach and that its objectives are to ensure that NPT obligations — including the requirement that the declared nuclear powers pursue disarmament — are equitably enforced.

‘South Africa has warned consistently that taking the matter to the security council from the IAEA involves serious risks of escalating confrontation, which could easily spiral into a dangerous situation for the region and the world and it also involves the risk of reducing the verification of the role of the IAEA,” Minty told the IAEA board.

The department of foreign affairs did not want to comment on Ghorbanoghli’s views, but a senior official insisted that South Africa had not changed its approach. ‘We have always insisted that there are two sides to this thing,” he said. ‘On the one hand, Iran has a right to nuclear energy; on the other, it must show the world it is compliant.”