Further to the point I made in yesterday’s post regarding the changed tone in the most recent Iran safeguards report, Reuters has run a piece today which expands a bit on the Amano versus ElBaradei contrast regarding Iran.
Describing the differences in style between the two IAEA DGs, Fredrik Dahl and Sylvia Westall write that the new Iran safeguards document “suggests differences in style between Amano, 64, and his predecessor Mohamed ElBaradei, who was regarded with deep suspicion by Washington and Tel Aviv.” A Vienna-based analyst quoted in the story attributed Elbaradei’s caution on Iran to the fact that the IAEA was ‘burned” on Iraq previously. “Because of his Iraq experience ElBaradei was very, very worried that the IAEA reports would be used to justify military action,” and that Elbaradei had sought to help Iran “dig itself out of a hole…Amano hasn’t had that experience and therefore his priority is not to find every possible way to get Iran to cooperate”.
When narrowly elected for his term as DG, Amano’s reserved technocrat demeanor did not bode well for bold, audacious moves. However, the Iran report has clearly reversed those perceptions. Writes dahl and Westall, “[Amano] quickly put his stamp on the agency’s closely watched quarterly report on Iran’s nuclear programme, moving away from ElBaradei’s relative ambivalence and declaring he feared that Iran was working toward developing a nuclear missile.”
