ENGAGING IRAN
Official Statements and Information
Including:
Back to the main page on Iran
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Chronology
of Key Events
January - June 2005, IAEA
With links to various IAEA documents, and access to pre-2005.
IAEA
Board Resolution
Vienna - 11 August 2005, IAEA
Urging Iran to halt its uranium enrichment programme and asking
the Secretary General to report on developments by 3rd September.
Press
Statement by the Director General
Vienna - 17 June 2005, IAEA
The Director General noted that Iran had facilitated access to nuclear
materials and maintained in full their suspension of enrichment,
but he called for swifter provision of documents and relevant material.
He backed the EU3 efforts to arrange a negotiated settlement.
Statement
by the Director General
Vienna - 14 June 2005, IAEA
General report to the Board of Governors, including a note on Iran.
Press
Statement by the Director General
Vienna - 13 June 2005, IAEA
Following his re-election, the Director General fields questions.
He speaks of his trip to see Dr. Rice in the US. “I hope Iran will
continue to be transparent to provide us the information we need.
I look forward to closing that file as early as we can. So the ball,
again, is very much in Iran´s court. The sooner they provide us
the information we need, the sooner we will be able to clarify the
outstanding issues.”
Implementation
of the NPT Safeguards Agreement in Iran
Vienna - 29 November 2004, IAEA The IAEA endorsed the Paris
Agreement, calling for Iran to continue with its suspension.
Press
Briefing by the Director General
Vienna - 18 June 2004, IAEA
“The Board adopted unanimously this morning a resolution that calls
in very explicit terms on Iran to accelerate its cooperation with
the Agency in order for the Agency to bring questions relevant to
Iran’s nuclear program to a close as early as possible.”
Press
Statement by the Director General
Vienna - 19 June 2003, IAEA
“We still have a lot of work to clarify safeguards and verification
issues in Iran with regard to the enrichment programme.”
Group of Eight (G8)
Gleneagles
Statement
United Kingdom - 8 July 2005
“We reaffirmed our commitments and called on all States to uphold
in full international norms on non-proliferation and to meet their
arms control and disarmament obligations. We emphasised our determination
to meet proliferation challenges decisively, through both national
and multilateral efforts… On Iran we support the efforts of France,
Germany and the UK, with the EU, to address through negotiation
the concerns about Iran's nuclear programme, and expressed once
again the importance of Iran combating terrorism, supporting peace
in the Middle East and respecting human rights and fundamental freedoms.”
A new Statement
on Non-Proliferation was issued.
Sea
Island Statement
United States - 10 June 2004
The G8 reaffirmed an Action
Plan, and called for all to sign the UNSC Resolution 1540.
Evian
Statement
France - 3 June 2003
A Statement
on Non-Proliferation on WMD was issued, and an Action Plan devised.
The Statement referenced Iran as follows: “We stress the importance
of Iran’s full compliance with its obligation under the NPT. We
urge Iran to sign and implement an IAEA Additional Protocol without
delay or conditions. We offer our strongest support to comprehensive
IAEA examination of this country’s nuclear program.”
United Nations
UN
General Assembly Resolution 59/205
Situation of Human Rights in Iran - 11 March 2005
Whilst welcoming progress in certain areas, the UNGA expresses its
concern at certain aspects of the Islamic Republic on human rights
issues.
UN
Security Council Resolution 1540
Non-Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction - 28 April 2004
The UN Security Council affirmed the threat posed and resolved “to
take appropriate and effective actions against any threat to international
peace and security caused by the proliferation of nuclear, chemical
and biological weapons and their means of delivery”. Providing any
support to terrorist groups with WMD ambitions is outlawed, with
special emphasis on the provision of materials, technology, and
delivery systems. Specific measures to monitor markets were enacted.
UN
General Assembly Resolution 58/195
Situation of Human Rights In Iran - 11 March 2004
Whilst welcoming progress in certain areas, the UNGA expresses its
concern at certain aspects of the Islamic Republic on human rights
issues.
Iranian Government
Concluding
Statement at the 2005 NPT Review Conference
M. Javad Zarif (GA) - 27 May 2005
Iran blames the United States and its “nuclear posture” for the
failure of the NPT to reform, and calls for renewed attempts to
ensure the “longevity” of the treaty. It places full responsibility
for the crisis on the current nuclear weapons states and their failure
to disarm as promised.
Opening
Statement at the 2005 NPT Review Conference
M. Javad Zarif (GA) - 27 May 2005
Iran blames the United States and other nuclear weapons states for
the failure of NPT reform. It calls for four primary pieces of action:
concrete steps towards making the NPT truly universal, negative
security legislation from the nuclear weapons states, guarantees
for the use of civil nuclear power, and reaffirmation of the 2000
NPT Review Conference’s 13-step Plan of Action.
Statement
on Draft of UNGA Resolution 59/205
Paimaneh Hastaie (GA) - 17 November 2004
Iran criticises the UN human rights machinery as lacking credibility
and legitimacy. The resolution passed annually against them has
never, they argue, gained a respectable majority. They are critical
of Canada for sponsoring the resolution. Iran highlights how it
has been relatively more open to outside inspection on human rights
than other countries in the region. They warn that unjust treatment
of Iran on this issue may jeopardise Iran’s attempts to re-engage
with multilateralism.
Statement
on the IAEA Report (2004)
Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi (GA) - 1 November 2004
Iran responds to the IAEA report, which they claim, has shown “no
evidence of diversion of the Iranian nuclear programme”. They assert
“the inalienable right of all States Parties to peaceful application
of nuclear technology, without discrimination”. They criticise the
sanctions and suspicions against them, indicating they have been
targeted for motives other than non-proliferation.
Statement
on Measures to Eliminate Terrorism
Mostafa Dolatyar (GA) - 20 October 2004
Iran asserts that: “An objective review of the recent developments
in our today’s world verifies that violence and terrorism of non-state
actors on the one hand, and unrestrained militarism of certain states
on the other, are two faces of a common problem which are mutually
reinforcing and fatally contributing to escalation of global insecurity
and lawlessness.”
Statement
on Draft of UNSC Resolution 1540
Mehdi Danesh-Yazdi (SC) - 22 April 2004
Asserting its support for non-proliferation objectives, Iran raises
“a number of serious and valid questions arises as to whether the
content of the resolution fairly and adequately addresses the issue
at hand. And whether the present action of the Council is consistent
with the letter and spirit of the UN Charter.” It criticises the
Security Council for failing to recognise the inter-relationship
between non-proliferation and disarmament and the right of all to
develop peaceful nuclear technology, both enshrined in the NPT.
Statement
on Draft of UNGA Resolution 58/195
Paimaneh Hastaie (GA) - 30 November 2003
Iran accuses Canada of “acting out of discontent resulting from
a point of contention in our bilateral relations” in sponsoring
the resolution against them on human rights. Iran denied recent
demonstrations were signs of repressive discontent, but rather were
symbols of an open and free system. Iran criticised the draft as
compromising its cooperation with the international community on
human rights, and deemed the Canadian attitude detrimental to human
rights causes.
Statement
on the IAEA Report (2003)
M. Javad Zarif (GA) - 3 November 2003
Iran emphasises the wide range of uses for nuclear technology, and
the right all states have under the NPT to develop it for peaceful
purposes. They are critical of western hypocrisy in their respective
treatments of Iran and Israel. “We must guard against further entrenchment
of the impression that membership in the NPT and the IAEA safeguard
regime in fact constitute impediments for peaceful use while non-membership
is rewarded by acquiescence.” They are critical of the motives of
the US and others. “Nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction
have no place in Iran’s defence doctrine, not only because of our
commitment to our contractual obligations under the NPT and other
relevant conventions, but in fact because of a sober strategic calculation.”
Iran pledges to suspend enrichment and sign the Additional Protocol.
Statement
on Measures to Eliminate Terrorism
Mohammad F. Fadaifard (GA) - 15 October 2003
Iran is critical of US unilateralism and suspicious of their motives.
“A genuine and effective fight against terrorism must include an
attempt to identify the underlying root causes of terrorism and
a concerted effort by the international community to address them.”
Iran highlights the need to combat state, as well as non-state,
terrorism. They address perceived weaknesses in the international
community’s current approach, including the lack of a definition
of terrorism.
Statement
before the First Committee of the General Assembly
Mohammad F. Fadaifard (GA) - 14 October 2003
Iran accuses the US of using 9/11 “as an opportunity to pursue the
unfinished ambition of forging a new world order through applying
military power for reshaping arbitrarily one of the most strategic
regions in the world”. They argue the false pretence of WMD in Iraq
has undermined the NPT. They criticise the nuclear weapons states
for failing to disarm, and particularly the United States for also
failing to sign the CTBT. Iran questions whether opposition to its
nuclear program is really based in non-proliferation concerns, highlighting
western support for it prior to the Revolution. They reassert their
peaceful intentions: “Iran has declared on many occasions that it
has never pursued a nuclear weapons program and will never do so.
Our nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes and therefore,
we have principally no problem with the transparency.” They call
into question the hypocrisy of not acting against Israel, despite
its clear nuclear weapons program.
Statement
on Measures to Eliminate Terrorism
M. Javad Zarif (GA) - 3 October 2002
Iran expresses its opposition to terrorist activities and notes
its longstanding hostility toward the deposed Taliban regime. However,
it also condemns the unilateralist approach to combating the problem:
“no nation can fight terrorism unilaterally”, and the attempt to
blame Islam as a religion. It calls for a multilateral approach,
including examining the causes of terrorism and ways to stifle their
funding and recruitment.
Statement
on the IAEA Report (1998)
Hadi Nejad-Hosseinian (GA) - 2 November 1998
Several years prior to declaring their own program, Iran asserts:
“Members of the NPT, as the treaty stipulates, has an inalienable
right to develop, research, production and use of nuclear energy
for peaceful purposes. This right should be ensured by member states
not violated. Not only should there be no impediment to the access
to nuclear energy, but there should be preferential treatment provided
to it in conformity with the treaty. This of course does not deprive
any state from raising concern about possible mischief by any State.
But this should not be arbitrary and unilateral.”
British Government
E3/EU
statement on 9 August
Vienna - 9 August 2005
Statement of position from the EU prior to the IAEA Board meeting,
urging them to put pressure upon Iran to cease their enrichment-related
activities.
Straw
Comments on Election of New Iranian President
London - 25 June 2005
Jack Straw expresses his concerns with the Iranian electoral process.
“I hope that under Mr. Ahmadinejad’s Presidency, Iran will take
early steps to address international concerns about its nuclear
programme,” he also stated.
Irans Nuclear
Programme: A Collection of Documents
Presented to Parliament - January 2005
The FCO compiled 33 documents related to the EU3 negotiations with
Iran (including IAEA, GAERC, and G8 material). In his preface, Jack
Straw complained that “Iranian cooperation with the Agency has been
mixed and incomplete and there are a number of issues which have
still not been fully resolved”. While accepting that the IAEA stipulations
of 2003 and 2004 were not required under the NPT, Straw believes
Iran warrants caution because of the dual-use nature of the technology
and its past record. “We have worked hard to achieve agreement with
Iran on the way in which this issue is handled, to give the international
community the reassurance which we seek whilst safeguarding Iran’s
right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology.”
Statement
on the Iran-EU3 Ministerial Meeting
London - 13 December 2004
Jack Straw welcomed the Paris Agreement, which had been endorsed
by the IAEA. “At our meeting here today, we have launched the process
of negotiating long-term arrangements.” He affirmed the object of
negotiations to provide “objective guarantees” to prove Iran’s peaceful
intent.
Straw
welcomes IAEA Boards adoption of resolution on Irans Nuclear Activities
London - 29 November 2004
Jack Straw stated that the resolution was designed to ensure Iran
remained free of nuclear weapons, and that it represented “real
progress towards confidence-building in respect of Iran's nuclear
programme and the development in relations between Europe and Iran.”
He accepted the IAEA recommendation to continue with the suspension
of enrichment.
Straw
welcomes signature of nuclear agreement
London - 15 November 2004
Includes the text of the Paris Agreement.
Straw
welcomes IAEA Board resolution on Iran
London - 18 September 2004
Jack Straw supported the IAEA in its concern with Iran, heralding
a united international approach.
Straw
welcomes first UNSC resolution on Non-Proliferation
London - 28 April 2004
“This resolution shows that the international community is determined
to respond. It makes clear that all states have a responsibility
to take steps to prevent WMD proliferation.”
Response
to Iranian announcement on nuclear facility at Esfahan
London - 31 March 2004
“'This announcement sends the wrong signal about Iranian willingness
to implement a suspension of nuclear enrichment-related activities.
It will make it more difficult for Iran to re-establish international
confidence in her undertakings.”
Straw
welcomes Irans signature of the Additional Protocol
London - 18 December 2003
Straw welcomed Iran’s move, but also warned that “much remains to
be done”.
Straw
welcomes IAEA Iran resolution
London - 26 November 2003
Straw welcomes the IAEA endorsement of the EU3 negotiations the
previous month.
Straw
to visit Iran to discuss nuclear programme
London - 20 October 2003
Straw, together with his French and German counterparts, visits
Iran, starting the EU3 process.
United States Government
President George W. Bush
Statement
on the Iranian Elections
Office of the Press Secretary - 16 June 2005
“Today, Iran is ruled by men who suppress liberty at home and spread
terror across the world. Power is in the hands of an unelected few
who have retained power through an electoral process that ignores
the basic requirements of democracy.”
On
Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation
National Defense University - 11 February 2004
“I have made clear to all the policy of this nation: America will
not permit terrorists and dangerous regimes to threaten us with
the world's most deadly weapons… We're determined to confront those
threats at the source. We will stop these weapons from being acquired
or built. We'll block them from being transferred. We'll prevent
them from ever being used. One source of these weapons is dangerous
and secretive regimes that build weapons of mass destruction to
intimidate their neighbours and force their influence upon the world.”
Bush outlined seven proposals aimed at counter-proliferation, including
reform of the NPT, accusing Iran of abusing a loophole in the treaty.
“The world must create a safe, orderly system to field civilian
nuclear plants without adding to the danger of weapons proliferation.
The world's leading nuclear exporters should ensure that states
have reliable access at reasonable cost to fuel for civilian reactors,
so long as those states renounce enrichment and reprocessing. Enrichment
and reprocessing are not necessary for nations seeking to harness
nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. The 40 nations of the Nuclear
Suppliers Group should refuse to sell enrichment and reprocessing
equipment and technologies to any state that does not already possess
full-scale, functioning enrichment and reprocessing plants. This
step will prevent new states from developing the means to produce
fissile material for nuclear bombs. Proliferators must not be allowed
to cynically manipulate the NPT to acquire the material and infrastructure
necessary for manufacturing illegal weapons.”
Department of State
US-EU
Joint Statement
On the Joint Program of Work on the Non-Proliferation of Weapons
of Mass Destruction - 20 June 2005
The US and EU outline several new initiatives to help counter non-proliferation,
including reform of the NPT, strengthening the IAEA, and advancing
the PSI.
US-EU
Declaration
On Enhancing Cooperation in the Field of Non-Proliferation and
the Fight Against Terrorism - 20 June 2005
“We remain united in our determination to see the proliferation
implications of Iran's advanced nuclear program resolved. Towards
that end, we reconfirm our full support for the ongoing European
efforts to secure Iran's agreement to provide objective guarantees
that its nuclear program is intended for exclusively peaceful purposes…
We reiterate the need for Iran to cooperate fully with IAEA requests
for information and access, to comply fully with all IAEA Board
requirements and resolve all outstanding issues related to its nuclear
programme. Finally we call on Iran to ratify without delay the Additional
Protocol and, pending its ratification, to act in accordance with
its provisions.”
Interview
with R. Nicholas Burns
British Broadcasting Corporation
R. Nicholas Burns - 17 June 2005
“The basis of the United States support for the European negotiating
team is that the end result will be that Iran will not have access
to the fuel cycle, that all nuclear fuel activities will cease and
they will be dismantled. If that is the result of negotiations,
then we'll be very pleased. But if that's not the result of negotiations,
then obviously, it'll be a different story.”
Interview
with R. Nicholas Burns
Voice of America Persian Service
R. Nicholas Burns - 6 June 2005
“We very much support the efforts of the European Union governments
to negotiate peacefully an end to Iran's nuclear ambitions. But
we make the assumption that Iran is trying to produce, ultimately,
fissile material and that, therefore, Iran is trying to develop
a nuclear weapons capability. And because of that, we believe it's
very important that Iran not be allowed to convert uranium, or much
less reprocess uranium, to engage in all the nuclear fuel cycle
activities along the continuum… They may say they have a right to
develop this capability, but we think they've given up that right
based on the fact that they have not told the truth, and based on
the fact that there is still a widespread international suspicion
that behind the veneer of a peaceful nuclear energy program lies
the ambition to achieve a nuclear weapon status.”
United States
Policy Towards Iran
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
R. Nicholas Burns - 19 May 2005
Burns highlights the five key areas of concern to the US over Iran:
their pursuit of weapons of mass destruction and long-range delivery
capability, their sponsorship of terrorism, its appalling record
on human rights and democracy, its violent opposition to the Middle
East peace process, and its interference in the affairs of its neighbours
(including Iraq). “We see no sign Iran has made the necessary strategic
decision to abandon what we conclude is an active nuclear weapons
program,” he states. “Let there be no misunderstanding in Tehran.
The international community stands united: Iran must not be permitted
to develop the capacity to build or deliver a nuclear weapon.” Burns
notes that the US is now backing the EU3 diplomatic process, “in
order to reinforce to the world that the ball lies squarely in Iran’s
court to adhere to its agreements”. While accepting Iran has not
violated the 2004 Paris Agreement, he is concerned by its recent
proclamations and emphasises the unity of the US and EU3. If Iran
fails to honour its agreement, it must be referred to the UNSC.
Burns notes the discontent of the Iranian people with its government,
implicitly suggesting that the five key areas outlined are of much
greater immediate concern to the US than regime change.
US Support
for the EU3
Condoleezza Rice - 11 March 2005
“President Bush had very good discussions on Iran when he was in
Europe which reflect a common view on the way forward. The Europeans
have been very clear with the Iranians that there will have to be
certain objective guarantees that Iran is not trying to use a civilian
nuclear program to provide cover for a weapons program. In order
to support the EU-3’s diplomacy, the President has decided that
the US will drop its objection to Iran’s application to the World
Trade Organization and will consider, on a case-by-case basis, the
licensing of spare-parts for Iranian civilian aircraft, in particular
from the EU to Iran… The spotlight must remain on Iran, and on Iran’s
obligation to live up to its international commitments.”
Irans
Continuing Pursuit of Weapons of Mass Destruction
House International Relations Committee
John R. Bolton - 24 June 2004
Bolton states that Iran is undoubtedly pursuing weapons of mass
destruction, despite signing up to treaties that ban them, and that
it is thus a rogue state. “The United States strongly believes that
Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons,” Bolton
asserts, “and has been warning publicly about Tehran’s weapons ambitions
for over a decade.” He quotes extensively from the IAEA Board of
Governors’ reports from June 2003 to June 2004. He believes a referral
to the UNSC is long overdue given Iran’s continual refusal to cooperate
with the IAEA, and he called on the Agency to support the US in
pursuing one. “All that Iran must do is to abide by the treaties
it has signed banning weapons of mass destruction and stop its program
to develop ballistic missiles. We cannot let Iran, a leading sponsor
of international terrorism, acquire the most destructive weapons
and the means to deliver them.”
Back to the main page on Iran
|
