The votes of the members of the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, given its composition, have always been and will be against Iran, and this approach will likely not change until Iran completely stops its peaceful nuclear programs.
This Council, which, along with the General Assembly, is considered the policy-making body of the IAEA, has 35 members. 13 members of the Board of Governors are from developed countries in the field of nuclear energy, and among them, countries such as the United States, the UK and France have nuclear bombs, and the United States also has a history of using this weapon in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. 20 members are also elected by the General Assembly, and 2 other members are from developing countries. Currently, there are 7 countries from Europe, 5 from America, 4 from Africa, 2 from West and South Asia, 1 from Southeast Asia, and 1 from East Asia. Therefore, the policies of this council are determined by Western countries such as the United States, Britain, and France with the support of their allies. The Board of Governors usually meets five times a year, in March, June, September (twice), and November, and sets policies in the interests of the nuclear powers.
However, it cannot be expected that there will be no political motivations in the resolutions issued by this council and that the technical approach will dominate its decisions. In relation to Iran, traditionally, the resolution proposed by 3 European countries (France, Britain, and Germany) with the support of the United States against Iran’s peaceful nuclear program was approved at the meeting of the Board of Governors, and the type of Iran’s cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency has no effect on the issuance of these traditional and repetitive resolutions.
Basically, the philosophy behind the establishment of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the composition of its council is to preserve the nuclear industry for a few powerful countries and prevent independent countries from obtaining nuclear energy, even for peaceful purposes. Basically, the countries that possess this energy do not want other countries in the world to rely on them for energy. Of course, the major strategic mistake of the IAEA and its Board of Governors, as well as the United States, Britain, France, and Germany, is that they have never reacted to the dangerous nuclear programs of Israel, and by highlighting the issue of Iran, are trying to divert public opinion from the dangers of Israel’s nuclear program for world peace.
On Wednesday, the Board of Governors, continuing its traditional behavior, adopted a resolution against Iran with 19 votes in favor, 11 abstentions, and 3 votes against. As always, it was based on fake Israeli information and did not consider the extensive cooperation of the Islamic Republic of Iran with the International Atomic Energy Agency. Of course, in the meantime, one should not ignore the anti-Iranian approach of the Director General of the Agency, Rafael Grossi, who is seeking to improve his position at the international level. He did not even condemn the US and Israeli attack on peaceful and safeguarded Iranian facilities, discrediting himself and the Agency.
The result is that the approach of the Agency and the Board of Governors will not change, considering its composition. Of course, in response to traditional resolutions of the Board of Governors, the diplomatic apparatus and the Iranian representative office in Vienna will issue statements and show the necessary reaction. However, what can make the Agency and the founders of the resolution against Iran aware is a change in defense doctrine and strengthening deterrence by using nuclear energy. Iran’s authority in using geopolitics and increasing deterrence by managing the Strait of Hormuz has shown that no power can resist the will of a nation that seeks to maintain independence and industrial progress. This geopolitical experience can be repeated in the nuclear field.
MNA
