Who is inspecting the inspectors?

An article in this morning’s New York Times discussed what is shaping up to be a strange ending to Mohamed ElBaradei’s career as director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency. According to the article, ElBaradei has in his possession a file containing disturbing evidence of Iran’s efforts to fabricate nuclear weapons. ElBaradei is under pressure from the U.S. and Europe to release the evidence and allow an open debate on its implications. ElBaradei has resisted, fearing accusations of pro-Western “bias.”

ElBaradei will leave the IAEA on November 30th. Between now and then, he will get a last chance to restore his legacy as the world’s nuclear proliferation enforcer. ElBaradei’s refusal to energetically confront Iran over its violations of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty has resulted in self-inflicted damage to his reputation. Should he leave it to his successor, Yukiya Amano, to open the Iran file to the public, we will be left wondering how ElBaradei viewed his mission at the IAEA. Was it to prevent nuclear weapons proliferation? Or was it to assist the developing world in containing Western power?

This week, advocates of the death penalty for murder received the greatest possible boost to their argument when Scotland’s justice minister released Abdel Basset al-Megrahi from prison. Similarly, ElBaradei’s tenure at the IAEA has provided no comfort for those who attempt to defend the usefulness of international institutions and international treaty law. Advocates of treaties such as the NPT, the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, the Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty, the Missile Technology Control Regime, and others have a responsibility to support the toughest possible enforcers of these agreements. ElBaradei’s refusal to be a tough enforcer has damaged the case for international treaty law as a means of conflict prevention. Yukiya Amano will come to work in December finding much damage to repair.