|
Disarmament DocumentationBack to Disarmament Documentation IAEA Report on Iran, excerpts and reaction, November 12-13Download the full report as a pdf file On November 12 & 13 a number of media sources carried stories on an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report on Iran, which has reportedly been leaked to some media outlets. According to the media, the 29-30 page report has been circulated to diplomats representing the 35 members of the IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna for discussion at their meeting on November 20. The report apparently states that there is "no evidence" so far that Iran has "sought to build a nuclear bomb", but criticises Iran's "breaches" of its nuclear treaty obligations. "Based on all the information currently available to the [IAEA], it is clear that Iran has failed in a number of instances over an extended period of time to meet its obligations," the report allegedly states. The IAEA reportedly concludes that given Iran's "past pattern of concealment, it will take some time before the agency is able to conclude that Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes." The report is widely quoted as stating that Iran needs "particularly robust" international inspections. According to the report, "the number of failures by Iran to report in a timely manner . . . has given rise to serous concerns." "Iran has now acknowledged that it has been developing, for 18 years, a uranium centrifuge program, and, for 12 years, a laser enrichment program," the report says. "In that context Iran has admitted that it produced small amounts of LEU [low-enriched uranium], using both centrifuge and laser enrichment processes . . . and a small amount of plutonium." Selected International ReactionUnited States'Serious Concerns', US National Security Advisor Dr Condoleezza Rice, November 13'IAEA Report Raises "Serious Concerns" about Iran's Nuclear Activities', excerpt from a briefing by US National Security Advisor Dr Condoleezza Rice, November 13. Q My question on Iran is, the IAEA turned out this fairly detailed report you're probably seeing now. The Iranian position on this is that it proves that they do not have a nuclear weapons program. I was wondering what conclusions you drew from that and what conclusions you drew from the public CIA report -- DR. RICE: Well, I saw one Iranian statement that it should lay to rest any concerns about what's going on in Iran. I think that's a, shall I say, an overstatement of the case. The IAEA report made clear that the Iranians have been concealing, that they've not been truthful in the past. And I think the issue now is are they going to be truthful in the future? Are they going to come clean about what had been going on Iran, what is going on in Iran? Are they going to agree to verification measures and protocols that give the international community some confidence, given that they weren't transparent in the past, that they're going to be transparent in the future? I think that the IAEA report raises very serious concerns about what has been going on in Iran and what might be continuing to go on in Iran. So the international community has an obligation, knowing now what we know about Iran's behavior, past behavior, to make sure that anything that is signed on to with the Iranians takes account of that past, and really insists on performance from the Iranians -- not promises from the Iranians, but performance from the Iranians. And that's the discussion that we're going to have in the IAEA Board of Governors. But I think the IAEA report was very strong. And while it said that there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons program, they made very -- quite clear that given what they had learned, and given this long history, that it was going to take a while to really understand the full extent of the Iranian program. Source: US State Department, Washington File, http://usinfo.state.gov. United Kingdom'We should be reacting calmly', UK Foreign Secretary Jack StrawEdited Transcript of an interview given by the Foreign Secretary Jack Straw to the Today Programme, BBC Radio 4, November 12, 2003. QUESTION: The Foreign Secretary Jack Straw is going to Washington today, he will talk about Iraq obviously there is a lot to talk about. ... There is also Iran, who have been forced to admit that they have been producing plutonium and enriched uranium even though they have denied it for eighteen years. You would only want that sort of stuff if you wanted to make a bomb. The American Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iran had dragged the scared garments of Islam in to the political gutter. Well on the line is Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary. How do you think we should be dealing with Iran? JACK STRAW: We should be reacting calmly to the latest report from the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Iranians have been concealing activities for many years, which they should have disclosed under the terms of the Non-proliferation Treaty. Since the IAEA board however, passed a very tough resolution by thirty five votes to one (the only one being Iran) on 12 September Doctor Al Baradei is reporting a considerable degree of co-operation by the Iranians. And this report which is certainly very worrying in terms of what it discloses, also shows a pretty high level of co-operation. I can't say whether the co-operation has been complete but it has certainly been substantial. The next stage is that the report will be considered by the IAEA board on 20 November, in just over a week's time and in the meantime there will be discussions with all our partners about what approach we should take. And certainly from the UK position, what I want to do about it is to ensure that it is resolved peacefully, quickly and within the terms of international treaties to which Iran and the rest of us are signed up. QUESTION: The point about this is that Iran has been even more badly than Iraq in the sense that we now have evidence that they were actively pursuing a nuclear programme. And again there was no evidence that Iraq was an active state sponsor of terrorism. Why is our reaction to Iran so very different to our reaction to Iraq? JACK STRAW: Well in principle I don't think it is. We took military action in respect of Iraq twelve years after Iraq invaded Kuwait and after resolution 678 and then 687 was passed saying that Iraq posed a threat to international peace and security. And also authorising all necessary means which means military action in respect of Iraq. QUESTION: So why don't we go to the United Nations now and say we should do the same to Iran? JACK STRAW: Because we have to pursue these matters patiently and by diplomatic means. Now there are no chapter seven resolutions in respect of Iran whereas there were a whole host of them in respect of Iraq. And what I was making clear repeatedly on your programme as well as in many other places during the run up to military action in respect of Iraq, was that we wanted a diplomatic solution to the situation in Iraq. And the international community had sought that solution to the problems in Iraq over the period not of twelve months but of twelve years. Now you say that the transgressions by Iran are more serious than those by Iraq, I beg to differ. There is no evidence of large scale active chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programmes on the scale which were disclosed and were discovered having been clandestinely hidden by the Iraqis in the mid 1990s. QUESTION: So well hidden that we still haven't found them. JACK STRAW: With great respect they were found and they were found only after defections by Iraqis and not by inspections and they were concealing those under the noses of inspectors. QUESTION: But here we have Colin Powell saying the Iranian regime has dragged the sacred garments of Islam in to the political gutter. Now we are the closest ally of the United States but we seem to be taking a very different view indeed of what he is saying about Iran. JACK STRAW: Well this allows me to make another point because we are either the poodles of the United States or, when we actually have a slightly different opinion from the United States, we are divided. What we have are some differences of emphasis. We are all agreed about the obligations which should be imposed on Iran and we all agreed the resolution that came before the IAEA board on 12 September. There are different analyses about Iran because of the history between Iran and the United States and the issue of Iran and America is felt more sensitively than it is in Europe. Now we have different analyses but we share a common objective. We want first of all to see Iran fully and completely complying with its international obligations. And we want to see a process by which Iran comes fully in to the democratic modern fold while having and being able to show full respect to its Islamic roots and to the fact that is an Islamic Republic. QUESTION: You've said twice before on this programme that that the idea of attacking Iran is not on the agenda at all and will not be. But if Mr Powell says we must go down the sanctions road, will you support him? JACK STRAW: First of all you are right to quote me twice on the programme, I am happy to repeat it a third time, just to say that there is no kite flying on that one. It is a matter for the IAEA board to decide whether or not the matter should be referred to the Security Council and in what circumstances. Now I am not going to pre-empt the decisions of the IAEA board taking place in about nine days time. We will be discussing with our international partners and in particular as well the discussions which I will be holding with Secretary Powell. I will also be discussing this matter in great detail with Dominic De Villepin and Joschkar Fischer, the French and German foreign ministers with whom I made the very important visit to Tehran on 20 October... Source: UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, http://www.fco.gov.uk. FranceStatements made by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesperson, November 14, 2003. Q - Is it true that France, Britain and Germany are currently working on a draft resolution for the Vienna meeting on November 20? Can you confirm these reports? First, I will answer by saying that the report from the director general of the International Atomic Energy Agency has only just been presented to the members of the IAEA board of governors. We are studying the terms of this report, in liaison with our partners, on the basis on which the governing board which will meet on November 20, will have to decide what steps to take. As you know, the three foreign ministers, French, British and German, went to Teheran on October 21. The Iranians at that time pledged to cooperate fully with the IAEA, to sign the additional protocol to the safeguard agreements and to suspend all uranium enrichment and reprocessing activities as defined by the IAEA. So that's where matters stand. The report itself follows the resolution of the preceding session of the board governors on September 12 which had requested Iran to clarify its nuclear activities, and summarizes the various inspection which the agency made and the information provided by Iran on its nuclear program. All this is under study, and we are following everything with the utmost attention in close coordination with our partners pending the meeting on November 20. Source: French Embassy to the United States, http://www.ambafrance-us.org/news/briefing/us141103.asp#7 IranIAEA`s Latest Report Could Have Been Better, November 12Iranian foreign ministry spokesman Dr Hamidreza Assefi said on Wednesday that the latest report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regarding Iran`s nuclear energy activities could have been better. Dr Assefi told reporters that the IAEA report had in several cases proved Iran`s claims that its nuclear activities are peaceful, stressing that it had also shown that Iran is extending a transparent cooperation with the agency. He said Iran`s reported activities to enrich plutonium had been at the very preliminary stages, and just for laboratory purposes. The foreign ministry spokesman further stressed that Iran is still debating with members of the IAEA board of governors regarding the upcoming meeting of the board to discuss Iran`s nuclear program... Source: Iran Ministry of Foreign Affairs, http://www.mfa.gov.ir/News/Index.htm. © 2003 The Acronym Institute. |