 Did you return your papers exam papers already? All right Okay, let's get started one of your friends asked a question. Well Arab, could you please reiterate that question so that everybody hears? Alright, so how do they start? carrying out inspections as I said here every non-nictor rep in state Party to the MPT that is a country Which promised not to develop Nictor weapons signed and ratified the treaty must conclude a safeguards agreement? safeguards Agreement must signed a safeguards agreement with the IAEA Within I guess six months after the ratification and this safeguards agreement Will be signed according to the model protocol because the model protocol in its 114 paragraphs Describes the the method and the procedure that will be applied by the IAEA in carrying out inspections So after signing the MPT as a non-nictor weapon state and ratifying it within six months Every country every non-nictor weapon state must conclude a safeguards agreement Based on the model protocol of 1970 which as I explained the first hour relatively weaker document and according to this document the IAEA and the country will Agree upon the methods and the procedures as to how to carry out inspections and after that safeguards agreement signed at a given time the IAEA will notify the country Whichever it's going to carry out inspections about its forthcoming visits Actually in the model protocol there was room for challenge inspections Normally inspections are carried out according to a schedule and the IAEA and the state authorities Sit and decide on the dates of successive visits of the IAEA during which these inspections will be carried out and Normally a nictor facility will be inspected maybe every year or every other year depending on its scale depending on the Significance of the material that may be there because you do not go and visit the same facility every year If there is nothing going on or there's not it is not likely for anything to go on in the future so it depends on the assessment of the IAEA technical body and This this fix a schedule as to how frequently These facilities that will be declared to the IAEA will have to be visited and inspection should be carried out so Once these inspections are carried out if everything is fine if IAEA does not find anything suspicious about the Amount of the nictor material that are used during the operations or about any other activity They say all right. I went to this particular Facility I carried out inspections according to the model protocols procedures and I have not found anything suspicious So I can say that there is nothing going on I can verify that things are going according schedule or according to the declared intentions of the states There is also as I said this challenge inspection a challenge inspection is an inspection Which will not be notified to the state authorities and the IAEA of course will on a very short notice For instance today is Tuesday and they send a cable They send a message or whatever call someone or send a telegram or something and Notify the state authorities that on Thursday a team will come and visit such and such facility to carry out inspections There may be some problems Because every single IAEA inspector will need a visa most probably to enter that country And if there is any problem with visa sort of issuance of visa this challenge inspection may be Postponed or they may not go to that country because of some other conditions or they may say well We cannot open our facility to to your inspections because of such and such operation going on Of course challenge inspection can be asked by the International Automotive Agency Board of Governors only if there is Good reason for suspicion about some activities going on so either after a routine inspection or After a challenge inspection the task of the IAEA is to report to the board if there's anything suspicious or if everything is Going on according to the declared intentions of the state if there's anything suspicious The IAEA Board of Governors will notify the state and will ask for further Clarifications about the points that the IAEA inspectors on the ground were not satisfied Either they may not be given escort to visit some place or they may not be presented enough material or they may not have enough Explanation about some missing material So the IAEA inspectors will say all right we went there But we were not satisfied so we cannot verify that they are doing everything fine So the board will ask for clarification and if the board If the state provides that necessary information which was missing during the Inspections then the board might be satisfied But if the board is not satisfied even after the clarifications of the state or No clarification at all The only thing the board can do is to take issue to the United Nations Security Council Because the board the IAEA does not have its police force does not have any enforcement capability so the only thing the IAEA can do is to sort of Transfer the file the dossier of that country to the UN Security Council and the United Nations Security Council Will of course deal with the problem so of course Can the IAEA rely on intelligence? According to model protocol the international atomic energy agency cannot rely on intelligence The IAEA does not have its own intelligence either. So the whole issue was of course depending on the Information that will be supplied by the state So if the state supply enough and and satisfactory information and allows inspections without any hinderance or without any obstacles provocations then the IAEA can go there and Carry out inspections if there's nothing wrong go back home to Vienna headquarters write the report and says There is this clean bill of health. There's nothing wrong with that country So therefore but if anything suspicious going on as I said or if they hear They get some intelligence From their resources, of course according to additional protocol. They can rely on this intelligence but Hans Plix was here a couple of weeks ago and he was the Of course previous former director of the IAEA before Muhammad El-Baraday and even before Rolf the chaos and Of course, he was the director of General of Unmovic and he said actually during his term as the head of Unmovic they were Provided with hundreds of intelligence reports from dozens of intelligence Sort of organizations and he said and I remember him saying that back in 2003 At the United Nations Security Council when it was presenting his report He said what we need is not lots of information lots of intelligence. We need is reliable intelligence So of course many states might provide intelligence Just as the ones that you see at the week leagues and many of which are baseless are just rumors are not Substantiated with facts figures data where five variable sort of a tangible information, but therefore This intelligence might fool the minds of these people. So what they need is Correct information reliable information timely information or intelligence about something that might be really going wrong and The IAEA of course depending on what kind of protocol is applied to that particular state May visit that country and if finds something wrong, of course, it will write in this report So the IAEA is prompted by of course first of all the the procedures and The sort of terms of the mother protocol They are given the right to ask for inspections for challenge inspections or to go to that country As part of the routine inspection schedule and if they hear something they may of course use this bilateral sort of Connections with people for instance the director general as I said in 2002 when there was this Revelations coming from the Iranian opposition group He went to Tehran asked for clarifications about Natan's facility, which was not declared to the IAEA and he was most possibly not satisfied because I was one of the scholars who were invited to the IAEA headquarters back in 2003 in early 2003 February if I'm not mistaken and El Baradei just came directed from Tehran and he did not even go to his office and came to the meeting room You might have seen this big hole the this the plenary room of the The IAEA and one of the first things he said I remember that Iran will have serious headaches about these allegations and Couple of months or a couple of yeah a couple of months later, and that was not public yet. I Was among these scholars who were informed by the IAEA Muhammad El Baradei about this situation, but of course we are not allowed to disclose This information to other people but Several months or a couple of months later He made this public statement and asked from the IAEA to sign the addition additional protocol and as I mentioned The deadline was December 31st and in early to November 2003 with the initiative taken by the European Tree The Iranian authorities signed but still not ratified the additional protocol according to which from November 2003 all throughout 2004 and early 2005 Until I made an adjunct came to power with the June 2005 election and a few months before that European Union Tree French British and German sort of Four ministers and Iran Incorporated as if additional protocol was enforced But as I explained when it came to carrying out inspections and parts in me meter base There was a deadlock. So this is again something about how difficult this situation is because after all on the one hand Iran has its sovereign rights to carry out in carry out all the Research and building facilities because according to article four of MPT States who promised not to develop nuclear weapons or not to divert their peaceful Nectar capabilities to meet your capabilities are allowed to develop Indigenously by themselves or by way of transfers with cooperation with other countries They can develop nuclear facilities for peaceful uses and enrichment as well as the processing are or such facilities they can be used for Peaceful purposes as well as meter purposes. So random enrichment enrichment and processing are Actually have two faces. They can be used for me tree and peaceful Me tree and peaceful purposes. I Mean if you and rich Somewhere between 3.5 to 8% It can be used in low-energy random light water reactors Or if you are rich up to 20% you can use in research reactors if you are rich up to 60 or even 80% you can use in submarines or aircraft carriers Because instead of carrying tons of thousands of gallons of gasoline if you have a Nectar reactor for sort of powering the The submarine or the aircraft carrier then it is of course no metric use I mean the fact that submarines might be or aircraft carriers might be me tree assets this does not mean that the use of 60 or 80% a rich uranium in submarines does not necessarily mean a military purpose Because when we say meter purpose we talk about weapons purposes and submarines fueled by nuclear reactor or For electricity generation for cleaning the air for Discellinating the water just to stay under the water for a long time. This is still within the context of peaceful use of course if a country has this much Unrich or even higher levels of them because in some submarines you have either 90 plus and which ran so a percent 90 plus percent and which ran so Still maybe within the formal formally within the context of peaceful use But this much a rich uranium is always something that can be easily diverted from Peaceful to major purpose. So therefore this is something I mean Richmond is a way Which may which might go all the way Of course 90 plus percent as weapons So you see from very peaceful uses In light water reactors, I mean power reactors just and generate electricity, etc Or research reactors 20% 5060 or even 80% in nuclear submarines or aircraft carriers still peaceful But when it comes to 90 plus percent and if the intention is to use in weapons warheads Then or as a atomic bomb that it is military Same applies to this you're processing as I try to explain you that I'm not going to go into the technical details not to bore some some of you but processing is the extraction of plutonium Actually, it is 238 Isotope which captures a neutron turns out to be plutonium to actually you 239 which is plutonium and this plutonium After some time, which is in the waste you sort of take the waste waste and put immersed in Deep water for cooling down takes about a year a year and a half and after that you take it out and you extract the plutonium Which is inside the waste and this plutonium can either be used in nuclear warheads directly Or can be used again for peaceful purposes in nuclear reactors And as I said before I mean in past previous weeks Many if not all of the Japanese nuclear reactors are fueled by plutonium and This is a real concern In some parts of course just like we have seen in the week leaks documents People do not say this allowed in front of public and they do not express their concerns about the stocks of plutonium That Japan has which according to some estimates might be enough to produce around 3,000 5,000 nuclear warheads But still the same plutonium can be used for purely peaceful purposes in more than 50 nuclear reactors of Japan But concerns are what if Japan one day changes its mind and Decides to go nuclear to develop nuclear weapons They will have enough plutonium stocked and They even you know built a very large plutonium-sensing facility in Rokosha Mura and Until such time they were sending the fuel The waste coming out of their nuclear reactors to France and Germany and they were getting back in terms of plutonium so this this plutonium stocks has have always been a very Sensible issue, but of course Japan is not a rock state. Japan is a democratic state Japan is a state which is quite aware of the very negative consequences of developing nuclear weapons by itself Breaching its international obligations not complying with the inspections, etc It is very unlikely that Japan might develop into weapons for the foreseeable future but if the whole international system changes and sometimes I mean unlike the past now the the frequency of Ground-breaking events ground-breaking developments is actually much smaller. I mean in the past Maybe every 30 years every 25 years some important things were happening now almost every Five ten years things are happening. So what if say from 10 15 years from today? some unusual developments take place some extraordinary developments takes place and and then Japan under the psyche of these developments for instance, North Korea and South Korea Reuniting and keeping their nuclear weapons capability. Japan then may decide to go nuclear This is something that was told to me by a Japanese ambassador So therefore and it was I mean he did not ask me not to say this anywhere. So this is not something Actually private and this is something that many people in the field know very well. So therefore These two technologies capabilities are Significant both for me tree as well as peaceful purposes It is important to bear this in mind and when a country develops a nuclear and Richmond capability or repossessing repossessing capability Of course, you look at the capabilities and the intentions remember threat is a combination of capabilities and intentions whichever of course should be Given more or a sign priority depends on the country that you're talking about and the context For some countries you may have to pay more attention To the developments in the capability because it might be a very stable country And it might be very unlikely for the intentions of that country to change For instance, Nordic countries Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands Belgium Germany Well, Germany is still being doubted by some anyway, but it is I mean you do not doubt their Intentions because for instance Sweden back in the 50s discussed this issue in the parliament after long discussions They have decided to put in the constitution a restriction for the forthcoming governments That would prevent them from developing new weapons. So it is by constitution Unlawful for any government in Sweden to embark on a nuclear weapons program It will be anti-constitutional if a Swedish government did something to to build nuclear weapons. So therefore You might be much more confident about the peaceful intentions of Swedish government, for instance But what about Iran or what about other countries in the world that are that have been and still are At the focus such as North Korea so therefore depending on the context depending on the nature of the regime or the Administrative style or making politics because some countries are more true to their words. I mean they act the way they speak and What we have seen again from these weak links that Turkey is sort of Statements before the public and behind the doors are very similar and as I said many times Not only here, but also to foreign diplomats or in the conferences. We do not know how to make tricks So really, I mean, I don't know whether this is a plus or minus But it is not in our culture to be very to carry out tricky politics. We do not know how to do it So we will definitely fail even if we try to do something like that, but some countries are very professional I will not name here anyone, but you can guess so therefore it is it is very Important to look at some countries capabilities Whatever they say about their true intentions, you may not believe or you should not even believe at all So therefore if there's any increase in the capabilities Whatever they say with respect to their intentions that they do not do anything wrong You should pay attention to the capabilities, right? So therefore in order to make an assessment about the Dimension of the threats so therefore it is something very Difficult to assess in the past Before France developed its nuclear weapons in the second half of the 1950s Because they tested their first device in 1960 and in the run-up to their first new tests There were some discussions in the French parliament in the French public in the press and the public in academic circles As to whether France was developing the weapons and the French parliamentarians ministers from the government inform their own Cabinets and all that their own parliamentarians and said and always said Denied all the acquisitions that France was developing weapons. They said no, we're not doing anything like that All our intentions are peaceful. We are not developing into weapons at a time when there was nothing that would restrict France from developing nuclear weapons. There was no MPT nothing And even after MPT there were nuclear weapons state So there was no reason to lie actually but what they did was to not necessarily tell the truth because this is a matter of national security and Especially after the Suez Canal crisis and after the goal who saw how the United States behaved during the Suez Canal crisis remember 1956 and That they were let down by the United States because British French and Israeli forces attack Egypt and Who intervened it was the United States and Russia of course I'm the Soviet Union because they did not want this issue to escalate So after this incident France lost its confidence in the United States and actually Because I studied with French professors at Lissé de Galatasar. I I know the French mentality They have to be at the forefront of everything at the center of everything So they said we have to have our independent nuclear capability and they embarked on Nuclear weapons development, but at the same time they said that they were not doing it So and then after they detonated their first thinker device that everybody knew about nuclear weapons Capability of France they said well at that time we had no other option but to say what we have said So there's no country which Exactly or declares what it is doing in any especially in any of such issues which have Nectar security implications So therefore this is something that we should also bear in mind. So when it comes to I mean going back to this issue the United States Perceives Perceives Iran as a as a threat for its own interests as well as for the interest of its allies because they are not necessarily sort of Confident about the declared intention of Iran because Iran says we do not build nuclear weapons This is against Islam. This is against the Quran. This is against our belief system. This is against our World view and everything but not many people believe in what they say and what when they look at their capabilities especially over the last 10 years there's a steady increase in terms of military capabilities, I mean the ballistic missiles whose ranges extended from 1998 which was 1300 kilometers and this year or let's say 2009 or 2010 It's approximately not this is exactly 2500 kilometers Almost double the range of their Shahab three missiles in tests. Well, this is a little bit of Distorted information, I'm not sure if they exceeded 2000 kilometers But information suggests that they have exceeded. Well, I'm still do dubious I mean, I doubt it but yet there is a clear indication that there is a steady increase in their military capabilities plus in their peaceful capabilities in terms of Bush area after now starting operation and Will still be will soon be generating electricity in the coming months and also a number of scientists Number of facilities that they have built some of which were secret just this time last year secret enrichment facility a clandestine enrichment facility was surfaced by the CIA and before CIA's declaration Iranians themselves have Dictated the world that there was another undictated enrichment facility of smaller scale in Qum So the Qum facility Was supposed to have something a capability to host 3500 up to 5,000 and and centrifuges And when when compared to the Natanz facility which could host not for the time being but when finished fully Which can host 50 55,000 enrichment and centrifuges The Qum facility would be significant especially if Iran After having and reach random up to 3.5 percent. Let me just I mean Put this here. I mean this is Natanz its capacity is 55,000 centrifuges and These centrifuges are rotating very fast and separating 238 and 235 and I will not go. Don't worry into details. You can just Google on On the internet and find a lot of information or if you like you can just read some of my papers And the install capacity Around 8,000 centrifuges and operating capacity Roughly speaking 5,000 centrifuges and so far Iran produced approximately 2500 kilograms of low 3.5 percent and which low and which random and Actually 1200 kilograms of which was subject to the swap deal just last May and as I mentioned previously And then I will talk more in detail so the concern of the West is that in Natanz which was not declared but now that we know There is such and such capability and out of the install centrifuges They operate approximately on the average some 5000 of them 6,000 sometimes 4,000 some other time and so far they have produced 2,600 kilograms of low-energy uranium which can be used only in power reactors such as the one in bush air but Why do they produce this much? Because the fuel of the bush air reactor will be given by the Russians given by the Russians already and Russia has committed itself to give the fuel of Bush air reactor in the coming years But Iran say what if they don't so we must be on the safe side so we must say we now feel okay fine but the concern is if Iran takes 1200 kilograms of this 3.5 percent low-energy uranium and takes this because it is not under the IS safeguards Then takes this to another facility the one in kum Had it not been unearthed I mean had it not been sort of declared to the world and In much smaller time this 1200 kilograms of low-energy uranium could be diverted to something like 25 kilograms of high-energy uranium of 90 plus percent Which could be a Capacity to one weapon So Concerns about Iran stems from this Yes, they have well Undeclared declared whatever all this Tibet is now left behind The director general of the IAE gave all this ultimatum the EU to intervene They did just sign the additional protocol not try to fight Etc. Etc. But finally there is this public knowledge everywhere in the world that they have this capacity and they have That general produce low-energy uranium at the face value this low-energy uranium cannot do anything well, it could be Threatening only if it falls into the hands of terrorist organizations and terrorist organizations if even you know 3.5 percent or 5 percent lower-energy uranium if you explode with high explosives Of course, it will irradiate It will disseminate irradiation and we may kill people not because of the nuclear explosion not at all there will be no such nuclear chain reaction with this much energy ranium, but The the the particles that will be spread into the air into the atmosphere will Sort of emit radiation and which will make people ill cancer over over a period of time So terrorist organizations in order to cause panic might be after even low-energy uranium just to explode with high explosives And cause fear to achieve their purpose and other than that 3.5 and which random doesn't do anything militarily Of course provided that it stays 3.5 percent and the concern is because the IAE a cannot go to Iran and inspect everywhere and Cannot make sure about whether there is or there is not any hidden secret clandestine facility Then the intonation community cannot be satisfied that whichever Produce as low-energy ranyum will remain as low-energy ranyum, but if there is another undeclared comb like Enrichment facility and if Iran takes this To this undeclared facility, then they may produce low-energy ranyum out of this this much enough for one weapon these are the issues that are being discussed in the international arena and Scientists are the ones who make these comments. I mean, I'm not a Physicist nuclear engineer, so I may not be making a very different of the comments But as an industrial engineer, I can understand some of the background discussion here, and I can sort of Assess very what is being discussed by the intonation community makes sense. Yes, it does make sense Of course, we cannot we're not in a position to blame Iran for doing anything like that and Iran is not found yet or As of now as doing anything wrong like this But the point here is not that Iran is not found guilty, but the point here is that This situation that Iran is not being given a clean bill of health Because the IA says I cannot say that they produce weapons But I cannot say the opposite either that they do not produce weapons because I do not carry out enough Inspections and because and I would like they say Iran the IA says we would like Iran to have ratified the Edition protocol for us to carry out inspections everywhere to take samples from air from water Actually, one of the major issues that the IA is complaining and you can go to the IA's website the org and Somewhere on the right hand side, you will see Iran and If you click on it, you will see every single IAA reports resolutions issued by the IAA over the last several years which in a sense Continues to assess the situation and one of the major concerns of the IA authority is Not only the secret facilities that may exist they say we cannot of Sort of a certain that there are no other secret We're not sure if there is any any other secret Facility, but another thing is they want to talk with the Iranian scientists There are a number of scientists that Iranians That the IAEA would like to talk about Iran's nuclear activities and the Iranian authorities in the past Allow some of them during this EU 3 and Hatemi sort of government But since Ahmadinejad came to power all this just are done out of the window and there is no Close cooperation between the IAEA at least We understand from IAEA's complaints that they are not getting enough cooperation. They say yes, thank you for this Thank you for that but these are not enough and We need more in order to assert and to make sure that Iran is not doing anything wrong and we're not yet at this point So this is the point. This is the issue which makes the situation all the more difficult, of course There are not many options for you for the United States Yes, they are concerned about Iran being a threat for themselves for their allies for Israel for world security For whatever reason, but what can they do? As you can see here and this In this paragraph here Iran is not Iraq. I mean Iran is a much bigger country geographically Population-wise, meter-wise much more powerful and much more coherent because during the Iran and prior to Iran Iraq sorry Iraq war Or the war between the United States or US invasion of Iraq Iraq was of course Divided de facto into three no fly zones in the north and south and in the middle Saddam Hussein was exerting its power to a certain extent under the sanctions and Prior to war, of course the coalition forces the United States in particular Collaborated with the north the Kurds in the north and the Shi'a in the south so they in a sense Promise them that they would be you know democratized after Saddam toppled et cetera Et cetera, but Iran especially when it comes to the nuclear question Nectar issue is a very coherent country. I mean even those in the opposition mean those who may have complaints about Ahmadinejad or other sort of people who are governed in the country When it comes to the nuclear issue they want nuclear program to continue and they don't want the the current administration to step down or just a step back or Sort of given to the pressures of the United States and the West so it is there for something which is Quite difficult so we'll continue with the EU on Tuesday next week There will be no class on Friday. I will be attending a conference. So on Tuesday next week We'll continue with this issue and please Have a look at this PowerPoint and also some of the articles that I've written and also just you know There are many websites for instance. I merely just mentioned one from console on foreign relations console on foreign relations You know this journal for affairs. It's one of the leading journals in the International arena in the international relations discipline and it's published by the console on foreign relations And if I'm not mistaken the Wutol has just been awarded something yesterday The one of the hundred intellectuals. So it is by the console for relations CFR.org CFR.org and Amelia just maybe you can ask her Emily you can just send the link to those who and get Amelia's email if you like and just make your own research Because you don't have to be satisfied with everything discussed here only in three hours a week You have your readings. You have my website other websites for instance go to the website of ISIS and The ISIS website there are satellite pictures taken from space About you know some Iranian nuclear facilities and there are a lot of discussion on the technical Dimensions of the issue. So anyway, I'll do your own research And by the way, remember that the op-eds are due on December 17th and that simulation due is due on 21st December and These are all serious assignments that will make up 25% each of your overall grade and considering your grades coming from midterm you should be studying hard and Make your decision before the final date of withdrawals All right. I'll see you on Tuesday next week. Hopefully