Contradictory statements issued on Wednesday by IAEA Chief Rafael Grossi and Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi about the agreement they reached the day before in Cairo left extremely unclear what the broader impact of that deal would be on the nuclear standoff between Tehran and the West.
First, it was Grossi who presented the deal to the IAEA Board of Governors as an agreement that had restored "complete" access for the IAEA to all nuclear sites within the Islamic Republic.
The IAEA's Grossi said in a statement on Wednesday that the "technical document" agreed provided for "a clear understanding of the procedures for inspection, notifications, and implementation..."
"These include all facilities and installations in Iran and also contemplate the required reporting on all the attacked facilities, including the nuclear material present at those."
However, soon after Grossi gave his optimistic statements, Araghchi demurred, saying that the deal does not guarantee the UN nuclear inspectors' access to Iranian nuclear sites and that Tehran wants further talks on how inspections are carried out.
"I have to reiterate the agreement does not currently provide access to IAEA inspectors, apart from the Bushehr nuclear plant," Araghchi told state TV in an interview.
"Based on reports that Iran will issue in the future, the nature of access will have to be discussed at an appropriate time," he added.
With that statement, Araghchi essentially reduced the deal to the limited progress that the IAEA had made with Iran already last week, far short of what England, Germany, France, and the US are demanding.
No joint press conference was held in Cairo to provide details on what the IAEA has been calling "modalities" regarding the resumption of inspections.
Pressed to explain the difference between his statement and the Iranian statement, Grossi's office had not responded at press time.
E3 activates 'snap back' mechanism, international sanctions against Iran
The agreement comes against the backdrop of the European powers having activated the process to "snap back" international sanctions against Iran on August 29.
Those sanctions, which were lifted under a 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and major powers, will kick in at the end of September unless Tehran makes additional concessions to the West.
While Iran's enrichment sites have been badly damaged or destroyed, it is less clear what has happened to the stockpile, which includes uranium enriched to up to 60% purity, a short step from the roughly 90% required for weapons-grade.
Araghchi said the IAEA's board of governors' meeting on Wednesday would be crucial concerning how cooperation with the IAEA develops.
He threatened to void the deal with Grossi if the global sanctions were reimposed.
However, the West has demanded that Iran not only restore full IAEA inspections and allow access to the enriched uranium, but also to make either permanent concessions regarding uranium enrichment, or to extend the snapback mechanism for six months so that the West's leverage over the |Islamic Republic will not expire as scheduled on October 18 (if it has not been activated to extended.)
Meanwhile, Israel has threatened additional attacks on Iran's nuclear program if the regime tries to reconstitute it following the air force's bombing of dozens of Iranian nuclear targets in June, setting back the program at least an estimated two years.