On 9 July 2015, VCDNP hosted a seminar by Dr. Trevor Findlay, senior research fellow at the Managing the Atom Project, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University, entitled "Proliferation Alert! The IAEA and Non-Compliance Reporting." Dr. Findlay presented the initial findings of an ongoing project on the IAEA's reporting of safeguards non-compliance. The study encompasses the theory, legal basis, and practice of such reporting, including the preparation, content, format, language, and use of reports by the Board of Governors and the UN Security Council. The research report, which will be published later this year, will identify lessons learned and make recommendations.
Findlay's research under the study covers both state-specific reporting on alleged or actual non-compliance as well as regular reporting through the IAEA's Safeguards Implementation Report (SIR). Findlay examines the five cases reported to the Security Council—Iraq, Romania, North Korea, Iran, Libya, and Syria—as well as the cases of South Korea and Egypt.
Findlay explained that the IAEA Secretariat has had to invent nearly every aspect of non-compliance reporting and procedures "from scratch" since the form, scope, and nature of reporting on non-compliance is not prescribed in the IAEA Statute or other foundational documents. Findlay's survey of non-compliance reporting has so far revealed several trends, including a dramatic increase in the number, volume, and complexity of reporting. One of his initial conclusions is that a finding of non-compliance remains a contentious issue in the absence of agreed definitions and standard processes and procedures. Nevertheless, in his view, debates over what constitutes non-compliance are unlikely to be resolved even by carefully crafted definitions since no two non-compliance cases are alike. Findlay believes the Secretariat and the Board of Governors need continuing flexibility in determining what characterizes non-compliance and how to respond to it.
In his historical analysis, Findlay illustrated how the IAEA Secretariat has gradually moved away from using the term "non-compliance" in its reporting, given the political weight the term has acquired. He argues that this actually reinforces the principle that it is the Board of Governors that must take responsibility for declaring a state to be in non-compliance, and that the Secretariat can instead focus on accuracy, necessary caveats, and assurances of credible technical data and analysis.
The research project is being carried out through a survey of key academic literature and content analysis of all publicly available reporting on non-compliance, as well as through memoirs and interviews with current and former officials. Audience members at the seminar provided feedback and input, and many welcomed the study's initiative to consolidate historical information and to provide a comprehensive analysis of the continuing evolution of non-compliance reporting.
