On Russia's #Ukraine nuclear work allegations, let's note this from @iaeaorg chief @rafaelmgrossi last June. IAEA not able to declare Ukraine's "broader conclusion" that its using nuclear energy for purely peaceful purposes for 1 reason: Russia's 2014 annexation of Crimea etc-1-
"The integrity of the safeguards process is paramount, and in this context, let me state that efforts continue in order that the Agency be able, once again, to draw the broader conclusion for Ukraine. I want to make clear this issue arises from current circumstances" -2-
"preventing the Agency from verifying certain nuclear material and the Agency has no proliferation concerns," @rafaelmgrossi. iaea.org/iaea-director-… -3-
And from US at IAEA Board of Govs in June 2021. "And while the Agency was no longer able to draw the broader conclusion for Ukraine, this was not due to any fault of Ukraine and raises no proliferation concern." vienna.usmission.gov/iaea-bog-2020-… -4-
So let's remember that when the Kremlin next makes wild accusations over Ukraine on nuclear work. The only reason Ukraine doesn't have a clean bill of health from the @iaeaorg on its nuke work is because of lack of access to Russia annexed parts of Ukraine. -5-
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
On the EU, yes there are different requests from different member states for safeguards. Yes, this will need to be negotiated, sorted out. Yes, the EU will probably carry on importing energy from Russia and there will no doubt be other exemptions. But...-1-
if you think they won't agree a broad package, along the lines of what the Commission/EEAS proposes, agreed in principle tonight and hammered out over next days, then I'd suggest you haven't been watching how the EU has moved this week. -2-
And never lose sight of the fact that while Washington and Europe have worked closely together, the US has massive leverage to force Europe's hands over sanctions. Iran is a reminder of that. European leaders finally learned that lesson after 2018.-3-
Here's my understanding of EU sanctions package proposed to member states this morning over Russia/Ukraine...1/Sanction all Russian Duma lawmakers. 2/ Asset Freeze on 3 Russian banks with links to separatist regions in east Ukraine... 1/2
3/ Sovereign debt freeze and a ban on lending to the Russian government and central bank 4/Extension of the current trade ban on annexed Crimea to separatist areas. 2/2
My understanding of the actual EU sanctions situation re #Russia is that consultations are going on at the top level of the EU institutions and there will be consultations with Washington and London on whether tonight should be trigger point for sanctions.
My understanding is the key question focuses on whether recognition alone would trigger a subset of sanctions, rather than the whole package.
There you go: clearly not the whole sanctions package...EU VDL/Michel: "The Union will react with sanctions against those involved in this illegal act."
At #MSC, @JosepBorrellF starts by zooming out from #Ukraine and talks about recent Russia/China agreement as an "act of defiance" against international order, seeking to undermine liberal democratic model & freeze out external forces from what they call "common adjacent region."
Under the Russia, China vision: states are sovereign, not the people. Says west must strive for its democratic model in Africa, LatAm, SEAsia -- the "swing" regions. "It's Russia and China the ones who want to go back to the 19th century" with the battle of empires.
Striking to hear @JosepBorrellF thesis of Russia, China dual attack on international system, minutes after @eucopresident pushes for engagement with China and lobbying again for Europe's stalled CAI investment pact with Beijing. -3-
Senior EU diplomat: #IranTalks "I expect an agreement very soon. Ideally yes, I expect an agreement in the coming week or ***coming two weeks or so***." -1-
"Most of the issues are already agreed. But as a principle in this kind of negotiations, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. So we still have...some questions, some of them rather political and difficult to agree." -2-
"Over the last 2 weeks, delegations have shown a lot of political will. It's clear that they want a compromise. It's clear that all delegations around the table -and that which is not around the table but it's around the corner, the United States - it also wants an agreement."-3-
JUST RAN: The Biden administration expects a restored nuclear deal would leave Iran capable of amassing enough nuclear fuel for a bomb in significantly less than a year, U.S. officials familiar with the matter said. wsj.com/articles/u-s-s…
Biden administration officials discussed Break-out time scenarios last fall and concluded that re-creating the 12 month breakout time that underpinned the 2015 deal was unrealistic. Concluded it would be “significantly lower.” -2-
Lower breakout time estimates (& yes, these will always be estimates), will raise new questions about strength of a restored deal and the US aim for a future longer, stronger deal. Some in U.S., Israel voiced worries that a restored deal would give Iran a more for less deal. -3-