High-Stakes Scene: Iran and IAEA Board Face Off; Will the Snapback Mechanism Be Suspended?

The IAEA’s regular Board of Governors meeting is taking place today (Monday) in Vienna, with diplomats noting that Iran’s nuclear program is once again at the center of attention. This session comes as IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi recently claimed that Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile at 60 percent purity has exceeded 440 kilograms—a claim that some observers believe could pave the way for renewed pressure on Tehran at this critical juncture.

According to Rokna, these claims emerge while Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has emphasized that Tehran is negotiating with the IAEA to establish a new framework for safeguards cooperation. He noted that this framework should align with realities following recent military attacks and the Iranian Parliament’s recent resolution regarding the nature of cooperation with the safeguards body. Prior to the session, Iranian representatives held intensive consultations with the IAEA delegation in Vienna.

Some analysts believe that if the Director General’s recent report forms the basis for decision-making in the Board of Governors, it may not necessarily lead to a new resolution against Iran. However, the impasse over the nature of Tehran’s cooperation with the IAEA could, in the long term, result in heightened Western pressures. Alongside the activation of the snapback mechanism following the European Troika’s thirty-day ultimatum, these pressures could close remaining avenues for diplomacy between Tehran and the West.

Meanwhile, some observers note that given the initiation of the snapback process by the three European countries through their recent letter to the UN Security Council, the adoption of a new resolution seems unlikely. Nevertheless, most analysts agree that the future of diplomacy and the possibility of an agreement between Iran and the West are partially tied to the outcomes of the Board of Governors session, potentially affecting Tehran’s negotiations with Europe and even the United States.

Kourosh Ahmadi: Reviving Diplomacy with the West Tied to Resumption of Cooperation Between Iran and the IAEA

Former diplomat Kourosh Ahmadi explained the likely outcomes of Monday’s Board session, noting that the regular session is routine and pre-planned, with Iran’s situation discussed alongside other matters. He emphasized that no resolution against Iran or referral to the UN Security Council has been proposed, and no unexpected measures are expected.

Ahmadi stated that the focus regarding Iran should logically be on the Director General’s recent report on safeguards implementation and the ongoing negotiations with Tehran. Discussions on cooperation between Iran and the IAEA took place last Friday in Vienna and are expected to continue. The main issue between Tehran and the IAEA is access to nuclear sites and the implementation of the safeguards agreement. Apart from this, no significant developments have occurred recently.

The former diplomat added that the IAEA aims to resume inspections and safeguard implementation. If negotiations remain inconclusive in the coming weeks, Western countries may hold an extraordinary meeting regarding Iran’s nuclear program to exert pressure. Currently, uncertainty prevails due to unresolved inspection issues.

Regarding Iran-West relations in light of the European Troika’s conditions for resuming talks, Ahmadi noted that few signs point to serious negotiations between Iran, Europe, and the U.S., or any substantive or formal agreement. The focus is currently on resuming Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA, and the state of Iran-West relations largely depends on Tehran’s engagement with the safeguards body.

He added that Europe has requested Iran to resume cooperation with the IAEA, and the U.S. also sees benefits in this resumption to enable a return to the negotiating table. Consequently, technical issues between Iran and the IAEA are intertwined with political matters, and decisions regarding inspectors’ access, especially to targeted sites, have become more complicated following Israeli and U.S. attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities.

Ahmadi emphasized that Iran views full cooperation with the IAEA without reciprocal concessions as a unilateral advantage to the West and is unwilling to accept this. However, if Iran can reach key agreements with the U.S. and Europe, the impasse with the IAEA may be partially resolved.

If negotiations with the IAEA fail and inspections do not take place, tensions with Western countries are expected to rise. Under such circumstances, the U.S. may seek to change Iran’s negotiation approach and show less interest in talks, potentially escalating pressures and prompting further U.S. and Israeli measures to increase pressure on Iran, including heightened sanctions or military risks.

Abdolreza Farj-Rad: Without the Return of IAEA Inspectors, Nuclear Agreement with Europe and the U.S. Is Impossible

Geopolitics professor Abdolreza Farj-Rad emphasized the importance of recent Iranian-IAEA diplomatic movements, noting that despite three rounds of talks in Vienna, the precise content of Iran’s proposals remains unclear, but the discussions themselves are highly significant.

Farj-Rad highlighted that IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi has recently taken more politicized and harsher positions toward Iran, seemingly following a meeting with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, as part of his efforts to gain U.S. support for a UN Secretary-General candidacy. He also noted that Grossi’s stance has negatively affected Iran after U.S. attacks on nuclear facilities, making it unlikely that the Board session will favor Iran. Previous criticisms of Iran’s nuclear program, previously backed by European countries, are expected to recur.

As the snapback mechanism’s activation approaches, Iran is likely to receive stronger warnings. Farj-Rad stressed that without the return of IAEA inspectors, constructive dialogue with the European Troika is impossible, and only after inspectors return can an agreement with the U.S. and Europe be feasible.

He added that given the recent Security Council letter triggering the snapback relies on the previous Board resolution, the adoption of a new resolution is unlikely. However, strong recommendations for the return of IAEA inspectors to Tehran will be issued.

Farj-Rad also noted that recent meetings in Doha between Araghchi and the EU High Representative indicate Iran is seeking to facilitate inspectors’ access, contingent upon reciprocal action by Europe. Tehran is unwilling to grant unilateral concessions.

Even if Iran does not withdraw from the NPT in response to heightened European pressures, it is expected to react to snapback activation, potentially including controlling or halting inspections for an unspecified period.

Europe, Farj-Rad emphasized, is reluctant to fully activate the snapback mechanism and seeks a negotiated solution with Iran. While there may be signs of a thaw in relations, Iran’s willingness to accept European conditions remains uncertain. Tehran prefers that the European Troika entirely forgo snapback activation rather than agreeing to a temporary six-month extension of Resolution 2231.

Currently, three main conditions from Europe could gain Iranian agreement, provided the permanent threat of snapback activation is removed. Farj-Rad noted that Europe remains under U.S. pressure, which opposes a six-month extension of Resolution 2231, fearing Middle East instability and loss of influence following snapback. Hence, suspension of the mechanism is considered more likely than its implementation.

He concluded that the results of the upcoming three-week intensive Iran-Europe negotiations will be decisive. Europe’s concerns also extend to Iran’s alleged cooperation with Russia in the Ukraine war, which, if managed, may increase the likelihood of snapback suspension, though certainty remains elusive.