The International Atomic Energy Agency's decision to end its 12-year investigation into Iran's nuclear weapons program is nothing short of outrageous. Worse, it is a reward, one showing that rogue states can flout international norms and endanger world peace, and emerge unscathed. Still, the decision was not exactly surprising. Earlier this month, the IAEA accepted findings suggesting that while the Islamic republic did pursue nuclear weapons, its program never progressed beyond the planning stages, reaching no more than the basic testing phase. The findings all but exonerated Iran from the accusation that it has been secretly pursuing weapons of mass destruction, and based on these conclusions, the nuclear watchdog has decided to close the case, effectively ridding Iran of the IAEA's pesky supervision. The decision is a significant step in normalizing relations between Iran and the West, and it moves up the timeline for lifting the economic sanctions that are currently crippling Iran's economy. While there is no doubt that Tehran is pleased with the IAEA's decision, those who have the global community's best interest at heart have every reason to be profoundly concerned. Yet again, the international community, especially U.N. agencies, have proven toothless, lacking the ability to truly investigate circumstances on the ground or penalize those who violate international accords. The IAEA failed to properly deal with the Iranian nuclear program from the get-go. It failed to detect Iranian activities, and it preferred to turn a blind eye to Tehran's nuclear efforts over the course of the last decade. It was only after the U.S. and its allies, primarily Israel, presented evidence indicating the true nature of Iran's nuclear ambitions that the agency reluctantly admitted there was an actual cause for concern. The IAEA's feeble stance on the Iranian issue, which follows its resounding failure in dealing with the North Korean nuclear program, raises questions over the credibility and efficiency of the international bodies tasked with dealing with such issues. This debacle is reminiscent of how the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons was surprised to learn that Syria's chemical warfare stockpiles were enough to make it a major world player on that front. The OPCW's failure cost thousands of Syrians their lives, when Syrian President Bashar Assad trained his sights on his own people. Even then, it took a U.S.-led demand to strip Assad of his chemical weapons. Much like in Syria's case, the Iranian question revolves around the issues of reward and punishment. While Assad had to forfeit his chemical arsenal, he was able to get away with using it against the Syrian people. Iran has had to slow its nuclear race to a crawl, but no one is demanding it be made to pay for systematically breaching international regulations and treaties. Iran's brazenness is doubly disconcerting as Tehran is a serial offender that has proved, time and again, that it is determined to mislead the world and deceive the international agencies seeking to prevent the development and dissemination of weapons of mass destruction. The capitulation deal inked in July between the West and the ayatollahs' regime can perhaps be explained by exploring political considerations, as politicians often have to sideline inconvenient truths when political reality so demands. The IAEA, however, is an international agency whose actions should be dictated by purely professional considerations, and there is simply no justification for its decision to shelve the investigation against Iran, especially when it is the residents of the Middle East, perhaps even the entire world, who will be made to pay the price.
All carrots, no sticks
פרופ' אייל זיסר
פרופ' אייל זיסר הוא מומחה למזה"ת ואפריקה וסגן הרקטור באוניברסיטת תל אביב
