The E3 presented proposals to Iran on 5 August, in line with an agreement reached by E3 Foreign Ministers and Dr Hassan Rouhani when they met in Geneva on 25 May. However, according to the agreement the proposals should have reached Iran by the end of July.
The proposals cover long-term arrangements for Iran's nuclear programme, political and security issues, and wider co-operation, but Iran claims such proposals are only an empty gift box that has been wrapped nicely and that they do not meet Iran's minimum requirements and expectations.
Following Iran's move to resume operations at Isfahan Uranium Conversion Facility on 8 August, which is being closely watched by IAEA inspectors, British Foreign Office Minister, Ian Pearson made the following comments in response to Iran's rejection of E3 proposals:
“We regret Iran’s decision to reject the E3’s proposals and are deeply concerned about reports that Iran has also decided to restart the Uranium Conversion Facility at Isfahan. We will discuss next steps in the IAEA Board of Governors tomorrow.
The E3’s proposals represent a serious attempt to find a way forward that would benefit Iran and the international community. We made them in good faith. They offer Iran the prospect of an improved relationship with France, Germany and the UK, on the basis of co-operation, while providing adequate guarantees to the international community that Iran would not be able to develop a nuclear weapon.
“The proposals take into account specific requests made by Iran. In a long-term agreement we would reaffirm Iran’s rights to the peaceful use of nuclear energy, exercised in conformity with the NPT; develop a framework that would provide Iran with assurances that it could rely on external fuel supplies for its light water power and research reactors; and promote greater co-operation between Iran and Europe.
“We asked Iran to study our ideas carefully, and suggested meetings of senior officials on 31 August and Ministers in September to consider them. Iran’s decision to reject them without discussion is damaging.
|
