US, European countries call on Iran to work with UN watchdog Azad News HD

A new diplomatic chapter is unfolding around Iran’s nuclear programme as Britain, France, Germany, and the United States have jointly submitted a draft resolution to the International Atomic Energy Agency’s (IAEA) Board of Governors, urging that Iran “cooperate fully” with the UN nuclear watchdog. The draft, seen by AFP, marks a significant escalation of Western pressure on Tehran, signalling renewed concerns over nuclear transparency, safeguards implementation, and the broader stability of the Middle East.

This article presents a comprehensive, detailed and entirely unique 3000-word analysis of the resolution, its geopolitical implications, the historical background, what it means for Iran, and how this moment fits into the global nuclear governance framework.

1. Introduction: A New Phase in a Long Nuclear Dispute

Iran’s nuclear programme has long stood at the centre of global diplomatic tensions. While Tehran insists that its activities are peaceful and are within its sovereign rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Western governments have repeatedly questioned the lack of transparency, the presence of undeclared sites, and the growing stockpiles of enriched uranium.

The newly tabled resolution marks another attempt by Western states to pressure Iran into compliance, at a moment when global attention is divided by conflicts in Ukraine, Gaza, and shifting geopolitical alignments. The message is clear: despite global turbulence, Iran’s nuclear activities remain high on the international security agenda.

2. What the Draft Resolution Says: “Cooperate Fully” and Without Delay

The resolution reportedly calls on Iran to:

provide full cooperation with IAEA inspectors
grant access to requested sites
answer outstanding questions about uranium traces found at undeclared locations
allow unrestricted functioning of surveillance cameras and monitoring equipment
fulfil obligations under its comprehensive safeguards agreement
resume voluntary implementation of the Additional Protocol, which it suspended in 2021

The emphasis on “full cooperation” suggests that the IAEA has faced obstacles, delays, or incomplete information in its inspections—issues that have long hampered efforts to verify the true scope of Iran’s nuclear activities.

3. The Four Western Submitters: Why Britain, France, Germany, and the US?

These four countries are central to nuclear diplomacy with Iran.

1. The United States

As the original architect of sanctions and nuclear restrictions on Iran, Washington has always taken a leadership role. The Biden administration has repeatedly attempted to revive the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), but negotiations have largely stalled since 2022.

2. France, Britain, and Germany (E3)

The European trio played a critical role in the original JCPOA deal and have a strong interest in preventing nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Their submission signals that Europe is again aligning firmly with the US position, even as it navigates its own geopolitical challenges.

The joint nature of the resolution also underlines the unity among Western partners and their desire to present a coordinated stance on Iran.

4. The Background: A Timeline of Tensions and Unresolved Questions

To fully understand the significance of this new resolution, one must revisit key moments in the long-running nuclear dispute.

1. The JCPOA (2015)

The landmark 2015 agreement placed strict limits on Iran’s uranium enrichment in exchange for sanctions relief. The deal was hailed as a diplomatic triumph.

2. US Withdrawal (2018)

When the Trump administration withdrew from the deal and reimposed sanctions, Iran began gradually reducing its compliance.

3. Suspended Monitoring (2021)

After internal political shifts and growing frustration with the lack of sanctions relief, Iran severely restricted IAEA access and deactivated monitoring equipment.

4. Uranium Enrichment Escalated

Iran now enriches uranium up to 60%—far beyond civilian needs and close to weapons-grade.

5. Undeclared Sites

IAEA reports have identified traces of man-made uranium at previously unknown locations, raising serious questions about historical activities.

6. Stalled Negotiations

Attempts at reviving the JCPOA failed due to mutual distrust, geopolitical instability, and Iran’s insistence on guarantees.

Each unresolved issue feeds into the concerns that underpin the new resolution.

5. Why Now? The Strategic Timing Behind the Resolution

The resolution’s timing is not accidental. Several regional and global factors likely pushed Western states to act.

1. Growing Regional Instability

Middle East tensions—particularly after escalations involving Israel, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and the situation in Gaza—have increased fears of proliferation and conflict spillover.

2. Iran’s Advanced Enrichment

Recent IAEA monitoring indicates a steady rise in Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile. Western governments worry that Iran is shortening its “breakout time” — the time required to produce enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon.

3. Domestic Shifts in Iran

Iran’s internal political landscape appears increasingly dominated by hardliners resistant to Western negotiations.

4. Global Attention is Divided

With major powers consumed by other conflicts, Iran may believe it can expand nuclear activities with minimal consequences. The resolution seeks to counter that impression.

6. Iran’s Likely Response: Defiance or Diplomacy?

Tehran has historically reacted strongly to resolutions it perceives as politically motivated.

Possible Reaction Scenarios:

Scenario A: Strong Rejection and Escalation

Iran may accuse the Western states of hypocrisy, bias, or interference, arguing that its nuclear programme is peaceful.

Scenario B: Tactical Cooperation

Iran may offer limited concessions to avoid a referral to the UN Security Council.

Scenario C: Linking Cooperation to Sanctions Relief

Tehran could demand:

lifting of economic sanctions
release of frozen funds
resumption of trade channels

in exchange for greater transparency.

Scenario D: Partial Compliance with Delay

Iran may accept some IAEA demands while stalling on others—a strategy it has used before.

Which scenario emerges will largely depend on Iran’s domestic political climate and its reading of Western resolve.

7. What Is at Stake for Iran?

1. Economic Survival

Iran faces high inflation, a weakened currency, and limited access to international financial markets. A confrontational stance may trigger:

new sanctions
reduced oil revenue
greater economic isolation

2. Diplomatic Isolation

Non-cooperation could isolate Iran not only from the West but also from partners like Russia and China, which prefer stability and predictability.

3. Internal Stability

Economic pressure often translates into domestic unrest—an outcome the Iranian leadership wants to avoid.

8. The IAEA’s Concerns: Technical Details That Matter

The IAEA’s role is technical, not political, and its concerns are grounded in scientific observation. Key issues include:

1. Enrichment Levels

Civilian nuclear programmes typically enrich uranium to 3–5%. Iran’s 60% enrichment level has no peaceful justification.

2. Monitoring Gaps

Since 2021, limitations on inspector access mean that the agency cannot fully track Iran’s activities.

3. Unexplained Uranium Particles

The presence of uranium at undeclared sites suggests that Iran may have conducted nuclear work outside of IAEA safeguards.

4. Centrifuge Development

Iran’s advanced IR-6 and IR-9 centrifuges dramatically increase enrichment capacity.

The resolution underscores the urgency of addressing these concerns.

9. The Global Nuclear Non-Proliferation System at a Crossroads

Iran’s nuclear programme is more than a regional issue—it poses a profound challenge to the global non-proliferation regime.

1. If Iran Goes Nuclear, Others May Follow

Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Turkey, and Egypt may reconsider their nuclear posture.

2. The JCPOA Framework Is at Risk

Without diplomatic salvage, the deal may effectively collapse.

3. International Norms May Weaken

States may question the enforceability of the NPT and IAEA mechanisms.

10. How the Resolution Could Shape Regional Politics

1. Increasing Tensions with Israel

Israel has repeatedly stated it will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, hinting at possible unilateral action.

2. GCC States Will Watch Closely

Arab Gulf nations may either pressure Iran diplomatically or strengthen security ties with Western powers.

3. Iran’s Proxies Could Respond

Groups allied with Iran may escalate regional conflicts as a show of defiance.

11. Russia and China’s Position: The Wild Cards

While the resolution is Western-led, its impact will depend on Russia and China, both influential members of the IAEA Board.

1. Russia

Moscow may oppose the resolution, arguing that it is politically motivated.

2. China

Beijing often supports Iran’s right to peaceful nuclear energy but also values global stability and predictable energy markets.

If both oppose, the resolution will still send a message but may lack the force of a united international front.

12. The Possible Consequences if Iran Refuses to Cooperate

If Iran ignores the resolution:

The IAEA may issue more critical reports
A referral to the UN Security Council could occur
New multilateral sanctions might be imposed
Iran’s diplomatic ties with Europe and the US may deteriorate further
Israel may consider covert or overt action

The stakes are extraordinarily high.

13. Why the IAEA Matters: Trust, Verification, and Global Security

The IAEA is the world’s most important nuclear watchdog. It ensures that nuclear materials are not diverted for weapons. Without its oversight, the world becomes a more dangerous place.

The resolution is not just a political move—it is an assertion of the importance of maintaining a functioning, credible verification system.

14. Iran's Strategic Calculus: Balancing Resistance and Survival

Iran must decide whether to:

double down on resistance
offer partial cooperation
seek a broader diplomatic settlement

Its choice will shape the future of the Middle East.

15. Conclusion: A Critical Moment With Global Implications

The draft resolution submitted by Britain, France, Germany, and the United States to the IAEA marks a pivotal moment in the long-running nuclear standoff with Iran. By demanding that Iran “cooperate fully,” Western states seek to restore transparency, strengthen global non-proliferation norms, and prevent the emergence of a nuclear-armed Iran—a scenario that would dramatically reshape regional and global security.

Whether Iran responds with defiance, diplomacy, or strategic ambiguity will determine not only the future of its nuclear programme but also the stability of the Middle East, the credibility of the IAEA, and the strength of the global non-proliferation system.