Syria and the International Atomic Energy Authority seem to have reached an impasse over nuclear inspections. According to a report this week, Syria is refusing access "to numerous suspect sites and has provided scant or inconsistent information about its atomic activities".

The problems began in 2007 when Israel bombed what it said was a nuclear site at Dair Alzour, reducing it to rubble.

Satellite pictures taken before the attack showed a building that was very similar to that of a known reactor in North Korea. Syria's behaviour after the Israeli attack also suggested it had something to hide. It cleared up the remains very quickly and, while denying that the building had been a nuclear facility, gave no explanation of its purpose beyond saying it was "under construction" and "related to the military". Journalists were not invited to visit the site – which would have been an easy way to allay suspicions if its purpose had been innocent.

More than a year after the attack, UN inspectors were allowed to visit and reportedly found traces of uranium which "had undergone chemical processes".

Syria, unlike Israel, is a party to the Nuclear Non-Profileration Treaty but, even if it does have a nuclear programme, this would 
not necessarily be a breach of the treaty. 

The IAEA could insist on "intrusive inspections" but for the time being, at least, it is still trying persuasion.

It seems likely that Syria does have some kind of nuclear programme but whether it has anything major to hide is another matter. The non-cooperation could just be a case of Syria being Syria. Along with most Arab countries, Syria is touchy about its sovereignty. And from the regime's perspective, playing games with the IAEA could also boost its self-image by putting it on a par with Iran.

Posted by Brian Whitaker, 26 November 2010