Search

Begin New Search Political Geography Iran Publishing Institution Institute for Science and International Security

1. Iran Nuclear Deal Procurement Channel Update: Is it being bypassed?

Author:
David Albright and Andrea Stricker
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
The procurement channel set up under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or Iran nuclear deal, appears to be considering fewer proposals than expected and is altogether unused by a traditionally illicit conduit to Iran’s nuclear, missile, and non-nuclear programs, namely China. The procurement channel was designed to regulate Iran’s imports of nuclear and nuclear-related dual-use goods for nuclear or non-nuclear use. Given that Iran’s non-nuclear industries have often imported nuclear dual-use goods, this finding raises the question of whether the procurement channel, and its associated Procurement Working Group (PWG), is simply not being used, but illicit, nuclear dual-use supplies are still going to Iran. Although no evidence has emerged of banned sales going from the United States, Europe, or Japan, which have often been targets of Iranian illicit procurement networks, there is concern that banned sales could be going from parts of Asia. In particular, Chinese entities may be continuing to make sales of nuclear dual-use goods to Iran without using the channel. The United States and its allies should augment efforts to detect and intercept the flow of any strategic goods from China to Iran and from other potentially illicit supplier countries to Iran. China needs to reach out to suppliers or distributors of dual-use goods operating on its territory and ensure that they are informed about China’s export control laws and PWG requirements governing the sale of nuclear dual-use goods to Iran’s industries, whether they be nuclear or non-nuclear.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Nuclear Power, and JCPOA
Political Geography:
Japan, China, Iran, Middle East, and United States of America

2. Correlating a Country’s Economic Output with its Level of Export Controls

Author:
David Albright, Sarah Burkhard, Allison Lach, Bridget Leahy, and Andrea Stricker
Publication Date:
04-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
The Peddling Peril Index (PPI) for 2017 is a strategic export control ranking of 200 countries, territories, and entities produced by the Institute.1 It evaluates states as to the effectiveness of their strategic export control systems. In this report, we evaluate the countries ranked in the PPI according to their Volume of Exports and Gross Domestic Product (GDP), both absolute and per capita2. This evaluation uses data on volume of exports and GDP, measured in U.S. dollars, as published by the United Nations and the World Bank. The nature of the exports for each country was not evaluated. The report focuses on the top and bottom 25 percent of countries by export volume (100 countries), GDP (100 countries), and GDP per capita (100 countries). It finds that six countries in particular deserve additional scrutiny due to their weak export controls and high volume of exports. They have very low PPI scores, meaning they do not have adequate export controls in place.3 They are: Indonesia, Nigeria, Kuwait, Viet Nam, Iraq, and Iran (Islamic Rep. of). Two additional countries, Colombia and Egypt, are identified as having relatively high GDP or GDP per capita, but exceptionally low PPI rankings. In general, countries with lower GDP per capita did worse in PPI performance, which highlights the need to tailor export controls in these countries to their resources. Chapter 12 of the PPI report describes several ways in which to do so, ensuring that the countries would have basic but adequate strategic export controls in place.
Topic:
GDP, Economy, Exports, and Illegal Trade
Political Geography:
Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Colombia, Egypt, and Nigeria

3. What is new in the Iran Nuclear Archive?

Author:
David Albright
Publication Date:
06-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
The Nuclear Archive seized by Israel in Iran contains much new information not previously available to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) or Western governments about Iran’s past work on nuclear weapons under the so-called AMAD project. I have reviewed much of the information gathered by the IAEA about Iran’s past nuclear weapons programs and it is compelling, but this information has many gaps and is unable to allow for conclusions about the current program and its intentions. The archive fills in many of these holes, and overall, according to the Israelis, it presents a relatively complete and alarming picture of Iran’s nuclear weapons efforts, and in far more detailed than previously available.
Topic:
Energy Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Science and Technology
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

4. Heavy Water Loophole in the Iran Deal

Author:
David Albright and Andrea Stricker
Publication Date:
12-2016
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
Although President-elect Donald Trump’s position on the Iran nuclear deal remains unclear, he and his allies in the Congress are expected to at least better enforce and strengthen the Iran deal. They should start by focusing on the deal’s heavy water loophole, whereby Iran can store offshore in Oman heavy water it owns and controls in excess of the nuclear deal’s limits, awaiting its eventual sale. To date, if the stocks in Iran and Oman are counted together (a reasonable view since Iran owns and controls both stocks), Iran has far exceeded the nuclear deal’s stated limit of maintaining a stock of only 130 metric tons of heavy water. Yet, this loophole was sanctioned by the executive body of the Iran deal, the Joint Commission. Despite such generous treatment, Iran has even so twice violated the narrow limit of 130 metric tons of heavy water it can hold inside Iran since the deal started in January 2016. Iran should no longer be facilitated in its overproduction of nuclear-related heavy water. Oman would do the world a favor by halting its willingness to accept Iranian heavy water and send any back to Iran for downblending. The return of the heavy water and its blending down would dramatically signal to Iran that violations of the Iran deal are no longer going to be tolerated, or worse, facilitated. Moreover, any further overproduction should be seen by the United States as a violation of the deal. It should work to end the Oman loophole and mitigate damage caused by a U.S. purchase of Iranian heavy water.
Topic:
Nuclear Weapons, Treaties and Agreements, Nuclear Power, and Donald Trump
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East

5. Additional Taiwan-Based Element of Iranian Military Goods Procurement Network Exposed

Author:
David Albright, Andrea Stricker, David Schnur, and Sarah Burkhard
Publication Date:
09-2015
Content Type:
Case Study
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
On June 25, 2015, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas announced that Kunlin Hsieh (or Xia) of Taiwan pled guilty to conspiring to violate U.S. export control laws and transshipment of dual-use military equipment from the United States to Iran.1 The goods had uses in missile guidance systems, secure tactical radio communications, and military radar networks. According to court documents, between 2007 and 2014, Hsieh, a Taiwanese national and sales manager of JunBon Enterprises of Taiwan, along with his associate Agris Indricevs, who was charged in the same indictment, procured and brokered the purchase of U.S. goods and transshipped them to Iran. They also worked with Ryan Surrena, another employee of JunBon, who was charged in a separate indictment. Hsieh will face up to twenty years in prison at a sentencing hearing scheduled for September 25, 2015. Indricevs’ case was scheduled to go to trial on August 10, 2015. Surrena was arrested in Texas in 2013 and worked with U.S. officials to further their case. He pled guilty to reduced charges in July 2014 under a sealed plea agreement, which likely takes into consideration his believed assistance, and is due to face sentencing in October 2015. This network represents another element of an already known procurement network operating among entities in Taiwan and Iran and targeting goods made in the United States. The network sent U.S. dual-use military equipment to several companies owned by Mehrdad Foomanie in Iran, such as Sazgan Ertebat Co and Moravid Sanant Co, Ltd.2 Foomanie, who remains at large, was indicted by the Texas court in 2011. Another Taiwanese national operating in the United States, Susan Yip, was arrested and sentenced in Texas. ISIS documented the case of Yip and Foomanie here. Yip used her Taiwan based company Hivocal Technology Co to procure goods for Foomanie in Iran.3 She pled guilty in July 2012 to charges and was sentenced to two years in prison. It appears that U.S. officials gathered additional evidence for charges before seeking to indict the other participants in the network.
Topic:
Military Affairs, Military Spending, Trade, and Illegal Trade
Political Geography:
Iran, Middle East, Taiwan, and Asia

6. Understanding the IAEA’s Mandate in Iran: Avoiding Misinterpretations

Author:
David Albright, Olli Heinonen, and Orde Kittrie
Publication Date:
11-2012
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Institute for Science and International Security
Abstract:
Much attention has focused on Iran's advancing nuclear program, on the peace and security concerns which that program has raised, and on the international policy debate over how to respond to that program. Far less attention has been paid to the various legal-sounding arguments used by Iran and a few academics to call into question the mandate of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to investigate and make determinations about actual or suspected violations of Iran’s legal obligations. Although arguments used by Iran and these academics to undermine the legitimacy of IAEA activities regarding Iran are patently false, they are nevertheless dangerous to both current and future nonproliferation efforts. Unless these arguments are clearly countered, and their fallaciousness clearly demonstrated for all the world to see, these arguments may decrease the chances of Iran agreeing to comply with its international legal obligations, could provide a fig leaf to those countries disinclined to hold Iran accountable, and might undercut the IAEA's and the United Nations Security Council's potentially pivotal roles in facilitating a peaceful resolution to disputes over the nuclear programs of Iran and future proliferators. It is in that light that we have chosen to address the dangerous claim published on September 13, 2012 by Daniel Joyner, a law professor at the University of Alabama, that the IAEA has exceeded its legal mandate in applying safeguards in Iran in accordance with a comprehensive safeguards agreement (CSA) under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In view of the importance of the IAEA's activities regarding Iran, the persistent efforts by Iran to call into question the legitimacy of those IAEA activities, and our concern to ensure that there is no misunderstanding as to the agency's mandates, we are writing to discuss those mandates and explain why Joyner is incorrect.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Nuclear Weapons, and Treaties and Agreements
Political Geography:
Iran and Middle East