Written answers

Wednesday, 21 March 2007

Department of Foreign Affairs

Nuclear Proliferation

11:00 pm

Photo of Bernard AllenBernard Allen (Cork North Central, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 233: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the position regarding negotiations between the EU and Iran regarding nuclear developments in that country; his view of recent comments by Hans Blix on this matter; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10618/07]

Photo of Dermot AhernDermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

As I indicated in response to questions last month, there are currently no negotiations under way between the EU3 and Iran. However, High Representative Solana did meet informally with lead Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani on 11 February last during the 43rd Munich Conference on Security Policy. This was their first meeting since discussions in September 2006, which failed to agree an acceptable formula for commencing negotiations on the package of incentives presented to Teheran in June 2006, on behalf of the EU3, the United States, the Russian Federation and China. While the tone of the meeting was positive, no indication was given that Iran was willing to move from its previously stated position, which has brought the issue onto the agenda of the UN Security Council.

On 23 December 2006, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1737, which required Iran to, inter alia, suspend all enrichment-related and reprocessing activities, and requested a compliance report from the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) within 60 days of the Resolution's adoption. It also obliged Member States to impose sanctions on Iran's nuclear and missile programmes.

On 22 February, the Director General issued the report as required, confirming that Iran had failed to comply with the terms of Security Council Resolution 1737. The report also confirmed that, while no declared nuclear material had been diverted to non-peaceful uses inside Iran, the IAEA remained unable to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities. The report concluded by stating the need for maximum cooperation and transparency on the part of Iran if the IAEA is to be in a position to provide assurances to the international community about the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear programme. Discussions are currently under way in New York on the substance of a follow-up to Resolution 1737, and it is anticipated that the Security Council will adopt a new resolution in the near future.

The question of Iran's nuclear programme is kept under constant review within the European Union at official level and is also the subject of regular discussions at Ministerial level. The most recent such discussion was at the General Affairs and External Relations Council meeting of 5-6 March 2007 in Brussels. At this meeting, the Council deplored Iran's non-compliance with UNSCR 1737, in particular Iran's failure to suspend all enrichment and enrichment-related activities, underlined the Security Council's expression of intent to adopt further appropriate measures under Article 41 Chapter VII of the UN Charter, and reaffirmed the EU's continuing support for efforts to find a negotiated long-term solution to the Iranian nuclear issue.

I presume that the Deputy is referring to recent comments by Dr Blix that suspension of enrichment should not be a precondition to the beginning of negotiations. I had the opportunity of discussing this issue with Dr Blix during his visit to Dublin in September of last year. I can understand but do not share his perspective on this point. There is of course, in the meantime, a Security Council resolution requiring Iran to suspend its enrichment-related activities. Our strong preference has always been for a negotiated solution to this issue and we hope that such an outcome can be achieved as soon as possible. Dr El Baradei's recent idea of a time-out or double-suspension may be worth exploring in this regard.

Photo of Ivor CallelyIvor Callely (Dublin North Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

Question 235: To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs the progress of the IAEA in addressing the concerns of the international community with regard to nuclear programmes and related matters; and if he will make a statement on the matter. [10596/07]

Photo of Dermot AhernDermot Ahern (Louth, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context

There are currently two nuclear programmes of concern to the international community in which the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is involved. These are the nuclear programmes of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) and Iran. The IAEA has been unable to draw any conclusions regarding the DPRK's nuclear activities since inspectors were expelled from the country in 2002. However, as part of an agreement reached at the Six Party Talks in Beijing on 13 February last, the DPRK agreed to allow the return of IAEA inspectors to verify implementation of the agreement, which includes a commitment from the DPRK to shut down and seal nuclear facilities at Yongbyon.

On 13-14 March, Dr El Baradei, Director General of the IAEA, travelled to the DPRK to hold discussions on the return of IAEA inspectors to the country. In a press conference following his visit, Dr El Baradei confirmed that the DPRK was ready to work with the IAEA to allow it to monitor and verify the shutting down of the Yongbyon facility. According to the IAEA, the next step would be to reach agreement with the DPRK on specific technical arrangements for monitoring and verification. These terms would be subject to approval by the IAEA Board of Governors. The DPRK also reiterated its commitment to the denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula.

At a meeting of the IAEA Board of Governors in Vienna on 5 March, Dr El Baradei gave an update on the implementation of safeguards in Iran. This followed publication of a report on the Iranian nuclear programme on 22 February, as required under UN Security Council Resolution 1737.

Dr El Baradei confirmed that no declared nuclear material had been diverted to non-peaceful uses inside Iran. However, the IAEA remained unable to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear material and activities as it was unable to reconstruct fully the history of Iran's nuclear programme. This was said to be due to a lack of co-operation and transparency on the part of Iran. While there was no concrete proof of the diversion of nuclear material, nor the industrial capacity to produce weapon-usable nuclear material, according to Dr El Baradei, quite a few uncertainties remained. Two decades of undeclared activities had shaken the IAEA's confidence about the nature of Iran's nuclear programme and Dr. El Baradei was unable to provide at this stage the required assurances that it was strictly peaceful.

Comments

No comments

Log in or join to post a public comment.