Iran Releases Statement to Remind IAEA of Cooperation Agreements

Iran’s permanent mission at the IAEA in a statement released at a Board of Governors meeting in Vienna on Tuesday reminded the International Atomic Energy Agency that the two sides had endorsed an agreement to deal with issues of difference, including the UN nuclear agency’s access to Iran’s Parchin military site, in an orderly manner and based on a work plan.

A look at the statement, which contains all items of the agreement signed by Iran and the IAEA, discloses that the UN agency had accepted to raise the issue of access to Parchin military site after several steps are taken by the two sides, meaning that the IAEA’s sudden demand from Iran to allow its team of negotiators – and not inspectors – who were in Tehran last month, to visit Parchin was in complete violation of the above agreement and only meant to serve as an excuse for negative media propaganda against Iran.

Yet, the Iranian mission adds in the statement that it allows the IAEA to visit Parchin to show its good faith, but of course this permission would be issued once and for all and under the terms stated in the two sides’ agreement, reminding that the site has already been visited by IAEA inspectors twice.

What follows is the full text of Iran’s statement released to the IAEA Board of Governors:

Permanent Mission of the Islamic Republic of Iran to the IAEA
Short Glance on Realities on the Ground
Two Rounds of Talks between Iran & IAEA
Board of Governors 5 March 2012

Pursuant to high level political negotiation, a Work Plan (INFCIRC/711) was agreed between Iran and the IAEA on 27 August 2007 for clarification of past outstanding issues. As the result of Iran’s proactive cooperation six issues were resolved by 2008 and reported by the former Director General to the Board of Governors.

In spite of the fact that the IAEA did not fulfill its obligations, including delivery of the documents on “Alleged Studies” to Iran, Iran did submit to the Agency its assessment in a 117-page document. The Work Plan was therefore concluded but the Agency, contrary to the Work Plan, has not declared it.

However, once again Iran made a historical concession by inviting the Agency’s team on 30 October, 2011 to pay a visit to Iran for the purpose of resolving issues and putting an end to a seemingly endless process.

A- First Meetings (29-31 January 2012)
Iran and the Agency’s team composed of senior officials had intensive discussions on how to deal with the issues and identified main pillars. The Agency and Iran exchanged their drafts of text on structured approach and modality for subsequent elaborations.

B- Intercessional Meetings (15-17 February 2012)
In order to facilitate the 2nd round of talks in Tehran, three meetings were held in Vienna where the following understandings were reached:

– The process would be Topic by Topic approach and the interrelated technical issues be categorized in one Topic in order to facilitate intensive, effective and conclusive approach.

– The Agency stated that all remaining issues are exclusively in the GOV/2011/65, which will be given in priority list of Topics/Clusters in the 2nd draft of modality.

– In this context the items such as detonator development, high explosive initiation, and hydrodynamic experiment that was originally proposed by the Agency to be as Topic-2, was agreed to be included in the first Topic. Therefore, the Topic-1 consists of 5 issues.

– It was agreed that the Agency will deliver documents which indicates if the alleged activities on each Topic are conducted by Iran.

– It was agreed that the text of the modality be concluded and agreed upon firstly and then based on this agreed modality the Topic by Topic approach be implemented.

– It was agreed that the Agency will prepare its questions on the Topic-1 (5 issues) and provide them to Iran in the subsequent meeting (20-21 February), in order to pave the way for effective implementation.

– Iran agreed to the Agency’s request to provide the initial declaration on the Annex of the Director General’s report (GOV/2011/65) in the subsequent meeting (20-21 February).

– It was also agreed that although the Agency provides its questions on Topic-1, but the request for access to Parchin be postponed after the BOG’s March meeting, in accordance with the Topic by Topic approach.

– Iran offered and declared its readiness in line with the demonstration of good faith based on proactive cooperation, to take practical steps including granting access on two issues in Topic-1 namely detonator development and high explosive initiation.

C- Second Meetings (20-21 February 2012)
Based on the proposed text of modality by the Agency, following steps were sequentially foreseen:

1- Agreement on the modality.

2- Iran provides its initial declaration on the Annex of report GOV/2011/65.

3- The Agency provides all questions on Topic-1 (5 issues) and delivers documents that indicate that alleged activities are conducted by Iran.

4- Iran will answer to the Agency’s questions.

5- The Agency will review and analyze the answers and will discuss with Iran about all actions to be taken on Topic-1 (5 issues).

6- The Agency will request implementation of action(s) on one issue of Topic-1, in accordance with Topic by Topic approach.

In spite of the agreement in Vienna (B above) and even contrary to the Agency’s text as mentioned above, the Agency’s team, based on DG instruction, requested access to Parchin.

It should be recalled that Parchin has been visited by the Agency twice in 2005 when the former Deputy Director-General announced that the issue was concluded and will be part of history and the former Director General reported to the Board of Governors. Considering the fact that it is a military site, granting access is a time consuming process and cannot be permitted repeatedly. In the light of this background and principle the Agency was requested to combine all related issues such as hydrodynamic experiments, and then once more, access would be granted. The process could be obviously started when the agreement on modality is reached.

In spite of the fact that the modality was not concluded, but Iran in line with the demonstration of good faith based on proactive cooperation decided to submit its initial declaration on the Annex of the DG’s report. This was one of the actions envisaged in the draft modality provided by the Agency.

The Agency was not prepared to deliver all questions on the Topic-1 (5 related issues) but it only did on Parchin and foreign expert. The Agency neither did provide any document nor did provide any clarification on these questions.

Iran reoffered its readiness to take practical steps including granting access on two issues in Topic-1 namely detonator development and high explosive initiation to resolve the two issues, but the Agency team did not accept the offer due to instruction of the DG to return back to Vienna.

Both sides however had intensive discussion on modality for the work on allegations, agreements were reached on many parts, but due to the planned team return to Vienna and time constraint, the text was not concluded.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has already made its decision to work with the Agency in a professional manner to resolve outstanding allegations in order to prove the world public that its nuclear activities are exclusively for peaceful purposes.

All Member States are therefore expected to support the process and to refrain from any measures which undermine the conducive environment desperately needed to pursue a successful conclusion.

Back to top button