Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 68: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position of reports of the international atomic energy association on the development of nuclear technology in Iran. [23530/08]

Ruairi Quinn (Dublin South East, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 81: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the details of the EU-US talks on the issue of Iranian nuclear technology and such reports as have been presented to the General Affairs and External Relations Council. [23531/08]

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

I propose to take Questions Nos. 68 and 81 together.

The Government strongly shares the widespread international concern about the nature of Iran's nuclear programme. We fully support the continuing efforts of the EU and its international partners to achieve a diplomatic solution.

The International Atomic Energy Agency's latest report on Iran's nuclear programme was issued on 26 May, as requested under Security Council Resolution 1803 of 3 March 2008. Although Iran had announced in February that it had completed a work programme with the IAEA to answer all remaining questions about its activities, the agency reported that a number of significant questions remained to be answered. These related to Iran's known uranium enrichment activities, to other actual or possibly undeclared activities and to specific evidence of activities relating to weaponisation. The IAEA also confirmed that Iran continued to ignore the demand of the Security Council in Resolution 1803 and three earlier resolutions to suspend its enrichment activity to allow negotiations to take place.

The European Union and the United States along with Russia and China have acted in a close partnership for a long period to try to achieve a peaceful diplomatic solution to this issue and to persuade Iran to negotiate meaningfully. This regular contact included discussions at the EU-US summit hosted by the Slovenian Presidency on 10 June and attended by President Bush. The summit declaration endorsed the dual approach of supporting the IAEA and Security Council action while at the same time proposing positive measures to encourage Iran to negotiate.

As the latest step in this continuing positive engagement the EU High Representative, Mr. Javier Solana, visited Teheran on 14 June accompanied by the political directors of the UK, France, Germany, Russia and China. He delivered a letter signed by the foreign ministers of these countries and US Secretary of State Rice. It restated their willingness and that of the European Union to engage positively with Iran and to recognise Iran's right to a civil nuclear power programme. The letter was accompanied by an expansion of the wide-ranging package of incentives presented to Iran in the summer of 2006. Iran rejected the proposals at the time without serious discussion.

Mr. Solana reported to the EU external relations council on Monday that his discussions in Teheran had gone well and that the Iranian side had promised to study this communication and respond to it. I hope Iran will give serious consideration to this generous and open offer, which has been delivered with such authoritative backing. It provides a real opportunity to resolve the nuclear issue and to develop a new and more constructive relationship between Iran and the rest of the international community.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Several issues arise from the Minister's reply. I have concerns, which I hope the Minister shares, about the bellicose statements being made by those of us examining the position of Iran. For example, there was a statement by one of the candidates for the US Presidency suggesting that if Iran proceeded to acquire nuclear capacity it would be obliterated. There are continual statements from Israel suggesting, more or less, the capacity of Iran to maintain nuclear military stock is imminent and none of this is helpful. I accept the Minister's comments regarding Mr. Javier Solana and his most recent report. In the case of the IAEA statement on 22 February 2008 the director general reported to the board of governors and, in summary, Iran is co-operating but has not implemented all elements.

The Minister will be pleased to know that I will not have to pursue him as I had to pursue his predecessor about the US-India agreement which is now as dead as a doornail, but was in clear breach of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. In the case of Mr. Javier Solana's approach and the report to the General Affairs and External Relations Council in the European Union there has been no demonstrable proof that Iran has contravened any aspect of the non-proliferation treaty. I support the suggestion that Iran should be encouraged in the direction of civilian usage of nuclear power and that it should not develop capability in a military direction. I share the view that it would be destabilising for the region. Does the Minister, Deputy Martin, share my view that the deliberate exaggeration of the Iranian threat is quite dangerous? Does the Minister have confidence, as his predecessor in Government did, in the impartiality of the group that acts for the European Union in the negotiations, all of whom are nuclear powers?

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The IAEA, to which Deputy Higgins referred, is not satisfied that Iran has answered all remaining questions about its activities and it reported that several significant questions remain. These include questions relating to Iran's known uranium enrichment activities, other actual or possible undeclared activities and to specific evidence of activities relating to weaponisation. The agency also confirmed that Iran continued to ignore the demand of Security Council resolution 1803 and three earlier resolutions to suspend its enrichment activity to allow negotiations take place. My sense of the briefing we received from Mr. Solana is that there is a genuine effort to effect a diplomatic resolution of this issue. The package offered to Iran, which included technical assistance and co-operation to build a modern civil nuclear power programme which would be superior to that planned by the Iranian authorities, along with the other set of proposals signed by all six groups is indicative of a genuine attempt to take the diplomatic approach, notwithstanding some of the public comments to which the Deputy has referred in the context of the US presidential election. The ball is very much in the Iranian court and it is for it to respond meaningfully to the package presented. Next week I will meet the Iranian deputy foreign minister Mr. Mehdi Safari who will visit Ireland. We will discuss the issue and emphasise the need for a positive engagement on the issue. This has been a very lengthy diplomatic engagement and people are learning as they go and are anxious to advance it. I do not get a sense from the EU side of the negotiations of anything but a genuine attempt to broker an acceptable deal that would dovetail with, or be in accordance with, our long-held desire for a nuclear-free Middle East and the non-proliferation treaty objectives.

Michael D Higgins (Galway West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Would the Minister agree there is considerable merit in keeping the European Union approach European? This is precisely the issue and there is more traction to the European Union approach than there is from the mediated approach of the United States, through Israeli comments. If the balance or the composition of the team that negotiates with Iran drifted towards the north-American version, it would be quite dangerous. I have difficulty with the Security Council resolution 1803, which is at a significant distance from the European negotiating position. The resolution has heavy United States and Chinese influences, whereas the European Union position is more pragmatic. This is revealed in the remarks on Mr. Solana's talks and report contained in the Minister's answer.

Micheál Martin (Cork South Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

The engagement must be credible. The three plus three approach, notwithstanding Deputy Higgins's reservations, offers potential. The fact that all six groups signed the communication to Iran is significant and is probably more significant than the general rhetoric on this issue.