News ID: 323917
Published: 0222 GMT September 03, 2022

Iran seeks to achieve lasting, unambiguous agreement

Iran seeks to achieve lasting, unambiguous agreement

Political Desk

Following the indirect exchange of responses between Iran and the United States regarding the European Union’s proposed draft of a potential Vienna agreement over the past days, the resolution of the safeguards issues appears to be the two sides’ main source of the difference.

To be more specific, the main unresolved difference between Tehran and Washington pertains to the PMD (possible military dimensions) case or the International Atomic Energy Agency’s claims of detecting traces of nuclear particles in some Iranian nuclear sites.

Iran stresses that unambiguousness must be the main feature of any potential nuclear agreement so that there would remain no room for the invention of further pretexts by the other sides to withdraw from the deal and pressure Tehran. Thus, the Islamic Republic insists that the safeguards issues must be resolved exactly at the present stage of the talks on the revival of a 2015 nuclear deal, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Citing and based on certain unverified reports presented by Israel, the IAEA claims that Iran is required to provide a convincing explanation about the “nuclear particles found” in some of its atomic sites.

This comes as Tehran is insistent that the allegation pertains to an old case and it has so far answered all IAEA’s questions. It says that the issue must be resolved in the potential agreement to be signed at the end of the nuclear talks, which started in April 2021 in the Austrian capital of Vienna.

In related remarks, Mohammad Marandi, who is close to the Iranian negotiating team, told Al Jazeera that the IAEA’s false and politically-motivated accusations leveled against Tehran in the Board of Governors are required to be withdrawn and no ambiguity must remain unresolved in the new agreement.

He added there are still some ambiguous expressions and sentences in the EU’s proposed draft and Iran calls for clarity, a request to which the United States should not object.

A few days ago, Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said the UN’s nuclear watchdog must stop its politically-motivated probes of Tehran’s nuclear activities.

However, on the other hand, a U.S. State Department official, whose name was not revealed, told Al Arabiya that his country insists that the investigations about the “detected uranium traces” at Iran’s nuclear sites must be completed.

The official, of course, stressed that Washington considers the nuclear deal’s revival as the most appropriate way to interact with Iran.

Although the Americans, in their initial reaction, have described as “unconstructive” Iran’s answer to their response to its viewpoints on the EU’s text, they are still assessing it and have not officially responded yet.

White House National Security Council spokesperson Adrienne Watson has announced in a statement that the United States was still “studying the [Iranian] response and coordinating with our E3 allies.”

“Some gaps have closed in recent weeks but others remain,” she added, stressing that President Joe Biden will only conclude a deal that he determines is in the national security interest of the United States.

In addition, an Israeli TV channel reported on Friday that according to an assessment by the Zionist regime’s Foreign Ministry, despite Washington’s stance that Tehran’s answer has been “nonconstructive”, Iran and the United States are only a few weeks away from achieving a final agreement.



Security Key:
Captcha refresh
Page Generated in 2/3571 sec