3 ms·

> Iran probably wasn't following the JCPOA Source?

by mikem170 23d ago

ericmay 23d ago
They deny access to “military sites” where nuclear research is done. I mean it’s not like they’re stupid or something.
- mikem170 23d ago
  I don't know how you got to "Iran probably wasn't following the treaty", when their adhereance to the JCPOA was certified by the U.S. (twice by the Trump administration [0][1]), until Trump wanted to renogiate, withdrawing and re-imposing sanctions in 2018. Everything I found says that the Iranians followed the treaty until they withdrew in 2021. You mentioned military sites... I wondered if the IAEA ever requested access to military sites? They were entitled to do so, under the JCPOA. I couldn't find anything in a quick search I just did. In your response above, you seem to imply that the Iranians may have already sneaked nuclear matarial to military sites. But the The IAEA found no evidence of that, at least as of 2025, well after the treaty, as per this summary report: > Iran held enriched uranium at all three main nuclear sites: Natanz, Fordow, and Esfahan. There are no indications that Iran moved stocks outside of these three sites [2] Once again, do you have sources for what you are saying, that the Iranians weren't following the treaty while it was in effect, or that there were military sites where they were hiding nuclear research? I'm not finding any. Or is this just an opinion, or a guess? I would say that one must be careful, those who profit in some way from war always exaggerate the enemy. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-administration-approves-agreement-but-review-looms https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/iran-nuclear-d... [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/us/politics/trump-iran-nuclear-deal-recertify.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/us/politics/trump-iran-nu... [2] https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-verification-and-monitoring-report-may-2025 https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-v...
  - ericmay 23d ago
    I'll have to dig up some sources later, if I don't then consider the point conceded I guess as a way of holding me to it. The other problem of course if the fundamental "need" to have a JCPOA in the first place. Iran can just stop trying to build nuclear weapons and then we don't need these kinds of agreements. They also enriched uranium: "Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency." [1] why were they even doing that? When I read things like that it's like who even cares if they were supposedly following the JCPOA? I'm not trying to change the subject or move the goalposts, but just pointing out how it's interesting that they have all this enriched material. Why do they even have it? Someone said they were following the agreement, why do they need to have this agreement to not enrich uranium? Just don't do it? [1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/securing-irans-enriched-uranium-by-force-would-be-risky-and-complex-experts-say https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/securing-irans-enriched-u...
    - mikem170 23d ago
      The IAEA also said: "In its May 2025 report, the IAEA noted Iran’s enrichment to 60% purity—beyond JCPOA limits but not prohibited under the NPT itself" [0] Apparently the Iranians started enriching to that 60% level, and self reporting, in 2021, as leverage in the unsuccessful negotions to bring the JCPOA back into effect to get sanctions dropped. International politics is what it is - power and self interest. There are those who don't want Iran to have a nuke. Iran has its reasons for wanting that capability. Throw in the crusades and ongoing holy wars, colonialism, oil, authoritarian regimes, propaganda, alliances, greed, etc - it's no wonder this is still a problem. One of many problems in that part of the world. Ironic that the U.S. got the iranian nucear program started, eh? [1] [0] https://nuclearwatch.net/2025-09-11/enrichment-under-the-npt-jcpoa-and-unsr2231-a-legal-and-political-reassessment-in-light-of-recent-developments/ https://nuclearwatch.net/2025-09-11/enrichment-under-the-npt... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Origins_under_the_Shah_(1950s%E2%80%931970s) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Origin...

> Iran probably wasn't following the JCPOA Source?

ericmay 23d ago

They deny access to “military sites” where nuclear research is done. I mean it’s not like they’re stupid or something.

mikem170 23d ago
I don't know how you got to "Iran probably wasn't following the treaty", when their adhereance to the JCPOA was certified by the U.S. (twice by the Trump administration [0][1]), until Trump wanted to renogiate, withdrawing and re-imposing sanctions in 2018. Everything I found says that the Iranians followed the treaty until they withdrew in 2021. You mentioned military sites... I wondered if the IAEA ever requested access to military sites? They were entitled to do so, under the JCPOA. I couldn't find anything in a quick search I just did. In your response above, you seem to imply that the Iranians may have already sneaked nuclear matarial to military sites. But the The IAEA found no evidence of that, at least as of 2025, well after the treaty, as per this summary report: > Iran held enriched uranium at all three main nuclear sites: Natanz, Fordow, and Esfahan. There are no indications that Iran moved stocks outside of these three sites [2] Once again, do you have sources for what you are saying, that the Iranians weren't following the treaty while it was in effect, or that there were military sites where they were hiding nuclear research? I'm not finding any. Or is this just an opinion, or a guess? I would say that one must be careful, those who profit in some way from war always exaggerate the enemy. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/iran-nuclear-deal-trump-administration-approves-agreement-but-review-looms https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/19/iran-nuclear-d... [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/us/politics/trump-iran-nuclear-deal-recertify.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/17/us/politics/trump-iran-nu... [2] https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-verification-and-monitoring-report-may-2025 https://isis-online.org/isis-reports/analysis-of-iaea-iran-v...
- ericmay 23d ago
  I'll have to dig up some sources later, if I don't then consider the point conceded I guess as a way of holding me to it. The other problem of course if the fundamental "need" to have a JCPOA in the first place. Iran can just stop trying to build nuclear weapons and then we don't need these kinds of agreements. They also enriched uranium: "Iran has 440.9 kilograms (972 pounds) of uranium that is enriched up to 60% purity, a short, technical step from weapons-grade levels of 90%, according to the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N.'s nuclear watchdog agency." [1] why were they even doing that? When I read things like that it's like who even cares if they were supposedly following the JCPOA? I'm not trying to change the subject or move the goalposts, but just pointing out how it's interesting that they have all this enriched material. Why do they even have it? Someone said they were following the agreement, why do they need to have this agreement to not enrich uranium? Just don't do it? [1] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/securing-irans-enriched-uranium-by-force-would-be-risky-and-complex-experts-say https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/securing-irans-enriched-u...
  - mikem170 23d ago
    The IAEA also said: "In its May 2025 report, the IAEA noted Iran’s enrichment to 60% purity—beyond JCPOA limits but not prohibited under the NPT itself" [0] Apparently the Iranians started enriching to that 60% level, and self reporting, in 2021, as leverage in the unsuccessful negotions to bring the JCPOA back into effect to get sanctions dropped. International politics is what it is - power and self interest. There are those who don't want Iran to have a nuke. Iran has its reasons for wanting that capability. Throw in the crusades and ongoing holy wars, colonialism, oil, authoritarian regimes, propaganda, alliances, greed, etc - it's no wonder this is still a problem. One of many problems in that part of the world. Ironic that the U.S. got the iranian nucear program started, eh? [1] [0] https://nuclearwatch.net/2025-09-11/enrichment-under-the-npt-jcpoa-and-unsr2231-a-legal-and-political-reassessment-in-light-of-recent-developments/ https://nuclearwatch.net/2025-09-11/enrichment-under-the-npt... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Origins_under_the_Shah_(1950s%E2%80%931970s) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#Origin...