2006
January 2006: Iran provides the European negotiating side with a six-point proposal, which includes an offer to again suspend uranium enrichment for a period of two years, pending the outcome of continued negotiations. The offer is dismissed by the Europeans, and not reported in the Western press. This offer of compromise follows several other offers from Iran, all of which were summarily dismissed by the US.
January 31, 2006: The IAEA reports that "Iran has continued to facilitate access under its Safeguards Agreement as requested by the Agency ... including by providing in a timely manner the requisite declarations and access to locations" and lists outstanding issues.
January 2006: The New York Times reporter James Risen published State of War, in which he alleged a CIA operation code-named Operation Merlin backfired and may have helped Iran in its nuclear program, in an attempt to delay it feeding them false information.
February 2, 2006: Pakistani Finance Minister Sirajul Haq: "Attack on Iran will be construed as attack on us"
February 4, 2006: The IAEA votes 27-3 to report Iran to the United Nations Security Council. After the vote, Iran announced its intention to end voluntary co-operation with the IAEA beyond basic Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty requirements, and to resume enrichment of uranium.
March 2006: The U.S. National Security Strategy decried Iran, stating that "Iran has violated its Non-Proliferation Treaty safeguards obligations and refuses to provide objective guarantees that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes." The term "objective guarantees" is understood to mean permanent abandonment of enrichment.
March 15, 2006: Mahmoud Ahmadinejad reaffirms Iran's commitment to developing a domestic nuclear power industry.
March 27, 2006: In a Foreign Policy article entitled "Fool Me Twice", Joseph Cirincione, director for non-proliferation at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, claimed that "some senior officials have already made up their minds: They want to hit Iran." and that there "may be a co-ordinated campaign to prepare for a military strike on Iran." Joseph Cirincione also warns "that a military strike would be disastrous for the United States. It would rally the Iranian public around an otherwise unpopular regime, inflame anti-American anger around the Muslim world, and jeopardise the already fragile U.S. position in Iraq. And it would accelerate, not delay, the Iranian nuclear program. Hard-liners in Tehran would be proven right in their claim that the only thing that can deter the United States is a nuclear bomb. Iranian leaders could respond with a crash nuclear program that could produce a bomb in a few years."
April 11, 2006: Ahmadinejad announced that Iran had enriched uranium to reactor-grade using 164 centrifuges. He said, "I am officially announcing that Iran has joined the group of those countries which have nuclear technology. This is the result of the Iranian nation's resistance. Based on international regulations, we will continue our path until we achieve production of industrial-scale enrichment". He reiterated that the enrichment was performed for purely civil power purposes and not for weapons purposes.
April 26, 2006: Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that Americans should know that if they assault Iran their interests will be harmed anywhere in the world that is possible, and that the Iranian nation will respond to any blow with double the intensity.
April 28, 2006: The International Atomic Energy Agency hands a report titled Implementation of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in the Islamic Republic of Iran to the UN Security Council. The IAEA says that Iran has stepped up its uranium enrichment programs during the 30 day period covered by the report.
June 1, 2006: The UN Security Council agrees to a set of proposals designed to reach a compromise with Iran.
July 31, 2006:United Nations Security Council Resolution 1696 gives until August 31, 2006 for Iran to suspend all uranium enrichment and related activities or face the prospect of sanctions. The draft passed by a vote of 14-1 (Qatar, which represents Arab states on the council, opposing). The same day, Iran's U.N. Ambassador Javad Zarif qualified the resolution as "arbitrary" and illegal because the NTP protocol explicitly guarantees under international law Iran’s right to pursue nuclear activities for peaceful purposes. In response to today’s vote at the UN, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that his country will revise his position vis-à-vis the economic/incentive package offered previously by the G-6 (5 permanent Security council members plus Germany.)
September 16, 2006: (Havana, Cuba) All of the 118 Non-Aligned Movement member countries declare their support for Iran's nuclear program for civilian purposes in their final written statement . That is a clear majority of the 192 countries comprising the entire United Nations.
December 23, 2006: United Nations Security Council Resolution 1737 was unanimously passed by the United Nations Security Council. The resolution, sponsored by France, Germany and the United Kingdom, imposed sanctions against Iran for failing to stop its uranium enrichment program following resolution 1696. It banned the supply of nuclear-related technology and materials and froze the assets of key individuals and companies related to the enrichment program. The resolution came after the rejection of UN economic incentives for Iran to halt their nuclear enrichment program. The sanctions will be lifted if Iran suspends the "suspect activities" within 60 days to the satisfaction of the International Atomic Energy Agency.
Read more about this topic: Timeline Of Nuclear Program Of Iran