Iran and the Nuclear Deal.

I mentioned the deal on offer to Iran over nuclear fuel here. Daniel Drezner was a great deal less sanguine about it here.

Two things -- 1) I don't trust the Russians when it comes to Middle East politics; and 2) according to the FT story, the reprocessing would take place in a Russian plant "under part-Iranian management." That doesn't make me feel any better either.

Fair points but Bronwen Maddox has further details today.

One senior European official said it was reassuring that there was "a great deal of common ground". All the countries agreed that there should be a "significant gap in the fuel cycle" — Iran should not be allowed to master all the techniques for making reactor fuel, which would also give it the expertise for making weapons. The plan for the moment, then, is to push Russia’s proposal of a fortnight ago. Iran would be allowed to prepare uranium in the form of gas, but enrichment of uranium into reactor fuel and reprocessing of fuel rods (another route to a bomb) would be done in Russia.

Now I should perhaps declare something here. I’ve done business (although  no longer do) with hte organization in Russia that would handle such work. Yes, they’re as corrupt as anything else in that country but they’re not fools. A nuclear armed Iran isreally not something that they would allow to happen either by chance or design.

We also have another problem, that Iran has a right to the peaceful use of nuclear power. It’s there in the treaties, that they have a right to do so. The best solution we can hope for is that they exercise that right but don’t have control of the fuel cycle, and thus not to the materials for bombs. Which is exactly what is on offer.

We might prefer it that the enrichment is done in France, the UK, Canada, the US, where we can keep a closer eye on it (and plants to do so exist), but I don’t think those are politically realistic. Russia or China it will have to be it seems.