Comments on: Iran Owned Part of Eurodif – Document Posted http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/document-on-international-enrichment-supply-posted.php Comments and analyses of important national and international security issues Tue, 14 Feb 2012 22:37:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Andy http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/document-on-international-enrichment-supply-posted.php/comment-page-1#comment-8430 Andy Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:45:31 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=2122#comment-8430 It's hard to have much sympathy for Iran's position on France's unreliability when it was Iran that unilaterally canceled the contract and demanded its money back. It’s hard to have much sympathy for Iran’s position on France’s unreliability when it was Iran that unilaterally canceled the contract and demanded its money back.

]]> By: Ivanka Barzashka http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/document-on-international-enrichment-supply-posted.php/comment-page-1#comment-8393 Ivanka Barzashka Mon, 09 Nov 2009 16:25:45 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=2122#comment-8393 Brian, The Eurodif case has been used by Iran as an epitome of why the West cannot be trusted to provide credible fuel guarantees and is part of the rationale for Iran's own enrichment program. I have not seen official statements in which Iran explicitly states that it is now entitled to French nuclear fuel. It is possible that currently there is less of a disagreement there than has been publicized. According to Iran, it actually purchased a 10 percent share of Eurodif in 1975 and "agreed to buy a quota of enriched uranium form the new plant". In addition, the Shah had provided a billion dollars as "financial aid". (INFCIRC/657) According to the French government, the 1991 amendment to the original 1974 French-Iranian agreement precludes Iran's access to technology and enriched uranium. I have not seen statements in which the French deny that Iran had those rights under the 1974 agreement (otherwise, agreeing to an amendment that specifically denies access to nuclear technology and fuel seems superfluous). This issue has come up again in recent TRR fuel negotiations. Iranian officials did not want to hold direct negotiations with France because it could trusted and Iran wants more credible fuel delivery guarantees. Brian,

The Eurodif case has been used by Iran as an epitome of why the West cannot be trusted to provide credible fuel guarantees and is part of the rationale for Iran’s own enrichment program. I have not seen official statements in which Iran explicitly states that it is now entitled to French nuclear fuel. It is possible that currently there is less of a disagreement there than has been publicized.

According to Iran, it actually purchased a 10 percent share of Eurodif in 1975 and “agreed to buy a quota of enriched uranium form the new plant”. In addition, the Shah had provided a billion dollars as “financial aid”. (INFCIRC/657) According to the French government, the 1991 amendment to the original 1974 French-Iranian agreement precludes Iran’s access to technology and enriched uranium. I have not seen statements in which the French deny that Iran had those rights under the 1974 agreement (otherwise, agreeing to an amendment that specifically denies access to nuclear technology and fuel seems superfluous).

This issue has come up again in recent TRR fuel negotiations. Iranian officials did not want to hold direct negotiations with France because it could trusted and Iran wants more credible fuel delivery guarantees.

]]> By: Brian http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2009/11/document-on-international-enrichment-supply-posted.php/comment-page-1#comment-8377 Brian Thu, 05 Nov 2009 22:05:12 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=2122#comment-8377 Where the disagreement I think arises is whether Iran's current arrangement with AREVA/Eurodif entitles it to nuclear fuel. Iran agreed to invest in Eurodif under the Shah, who lent the project $1 billion. The loan would have entitled Iran to buy 10% of the enriched uranium produced by the plant. In 1977, Iran paid another $180 million for future enrichment services. But after the revolution, Tehran canceled its agreement and halted payment because Khomeini wasn't interested in nuclear power. Iran demanded its loan be repaid with interest. According to the French, when they settled the dispute in 1991, Iran was reimbursed $1.6 billion for its original 1974 loan plus interest. The deal also rendered Iran an indirect shareholder in Eurodif (AREVA now says "sleeping partner") through Soldif. This arrangement only entitles Iran to take part in meetings of Eurodif's supervisory board, collect Eurodif dividents, and redistribute dividends to its shareholders. The 1991 arrangements does not entitle Iran to technology or enriched uranium. Unfortunately, the document we really need to get our hands on is not likely to be released any time soon. Where the disagreement I think arises is whether Iran’s current arrangement with AREVA/Eurodif entitles it to nuclear fuel.

Iran agreed to invest in Eurodif under the Shah, who lent the project $1 billion. The loan would have entitled Iran to buy 10% of the enriched uranium produced by the plant. In 1977, Iran paid another $180 million for future enrichment services. But after the revolution, Tehran canceled its agreement and halted payment because Khomeini wasn’t interested in nuclear power. Iran demanded its loan be repaid with interest.

According to the French, when they settled the dispute in 1991, Iran was reimbursed $1.6 billion for its original 1974 loan plus interest. The deal also rendered Iran an indirect shareholder in Eurodif (AREVA now says “sleeping partner”) through Soldif. This arrangement only entitles Iran to take part in meetings of Eurodif’s supervisory board, collect Eurodif dividents, and redistribute dividends to its shareholders. The 1991 arrangements does not entitle Iran to technology or enriched uranium. Unfortunately, the document we really need to get our hands on is not likely to be released any time soon.

]]>