Araghchi: Iran’s Cooperation with IAEA Serves National Interests and International Obligations

According to Rokna, Foreign Minister Seyed Abbas Araghchi, on Thursday evening (September 11), in a live interview on the program “Special News Talk,” responded to questions concerning the agreement between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the IAEA in Cairo, the capital of Egypt, as well as the latest status of negotiations with the European Troika regarding the lifting of sanctions.

Iran’s Legal and Political Dispute with the European Troika over the Snapback Mechanism Continues

In response to a question on whether the agreement and IAEA’s knowledge of the status of Iran’s enriched materials could facilitate further attacks on nuclear facilities, Araghchi explained that two issues must be distinguished: first, Iran’s ongoing negotiations with the three European states, which, despite their ostensible commitment to the JCPOA, have been accompanied by continuous sessions over recent years, including during the 12-day war. He recalled that even during those days, he traveled by land to participate in several international conferences and held meetings in Geneva with the foreign ministers of those countries and Ms. Kallas, the High Representative of the European Union. These talks continued thereafter.

He emphasized that one of the main disputes concerned the so-called “snapback” mechanism, which the three European states threatened to invoke. Iran, as well as Russia and China, rejected their right to do so. Detailed explanations were provided in his correspondence with the President of the Security Council and in separate and joint letters from the foreign ministers of Russia and China. This remains a legal and political dispute that, in Iran’s view, the Europeans have no basis to claim.

European Troika’s Conditions for Extending UNSCR 2231 Were Rejected

Araghchi said the Europeans once presented certain conditions for extending the mechanism, claiming it would “offer another chance to diplomacy.” However, Iran not only refused to accept such conditions but also rejected the legitimacy of the Europeans’ claim to impose them. The conditions were neither genuine nor rational and contradicted Iran’s national interests. This dispute continues, with Iran’s mission in New York conducting intensive consultations with Russia, China, and several other Security Council members.

He stressed that cooperation with the IAEA is entirely independent of these conditions, noting that Iran had initiated consultations with the Agency prior to the European proposals. Despite attacks and bombings targeting Iranian nuclear facilities, cooperation with the IAEA serves both Iran’s interests and international obligations. As a committed member of the NPT, Iran remains bound by the treaty’s requirements.

No New Developments Regarding Iran’s Nuclear Materials

The Foreign Minister clarified that no new developments have occurred regarding Iran’s nuclear materials. He elaborated that Iran had already begun talks with the IAEA, as previous modes of cooperation were no longer feasible due to two factors: the changes caused by attacks on certain nuclear facilities, and the law passed by the Islamic Consultative Assembly mandating government compliance. Negotiations were therefore initiated with the IAEA to establish a new framework.

IAEA Accepts That Cooperation with Iran Cannot Continue as Before

Araghchi noted that these talks led to a visit by the IAEA Deputy Director-General to Tehran, followed by an Iranian delegation to Vienna. A draft text was prepared, with 10–20% remaining unfinished. It was then decided that negotiations would continue in a third country between him and IAEA Director-General Rafael Grossi. This process concluded in Cairo, where a new cooperation framework was signed.

He highlighted the framework’s main features:

1. The IAEA acknowledged that attacks on Iranian nuclear facilities were unlawful, violating international law, the UN Charter, and the Agency’s Statute.

2. The IAEA officially recognized that new circumstances necessitate a new framework for cooperation.

3. The Agency accepted that the Iranian parliament’s law is binding, and future cooperation must adhere to it.

4. The agreement stipulates that all matters must be pursued and implemented through Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC).

5. The IAEA acknowledged differences between bombed and intact facilities, each requiring distinct considerations.

Russian Operators at Bushehr Link Fuel Replacement to IAEA Inspectors’ Presence

Araghchi cited the Bushehr nuclear power plant, where fuel replacement must be conducted with IAEA inspectors present, as required under international regulations. Even the Russian operators insisted on the inspectors’ presence. The SNSC therefore authorized their attendance so the fuel replacement could proceed under strict procedures.

Similarly, the Tehran Research Reactor, essential for producing nuclear medicine for around one million patients, also requires inspections. Such requests are referred to the SNSC, which issues authorizations on a case-by-case basis.

He stressed that Iran’s concerns regarding nuclear security were recognized as legitimate by the IAEA, and no inspections will occur until Iran completes environmental and safety measures. Reports will first be submitted to the SNSC, which will decide the level of disclosure to the IAEA. At present, no inspections have occurred, nor has any agreement for inspections been finalized.

Agreement Valid Only if No Hostile Actions, Including Snapback, Are Taken

Araghchi emphasized that the new agreement fully incorporates the parliament’s law, addresses Iran’s security concerns, and has been formally acknowledged by the IAEA. However, the agreement remains valid only so long as no hostile actions—such as activating the snapback mechanism—are undertaken against Iran. If snapback is triggered, the agreement will lose its validity.

He further clarified that nuclear materials buried under rubble from bombed facilities are under evaluation by the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, which will report to the SNSC for a final decision.

On the Nature of Negotiations and Draft Texts

Araghchi noted that while different interpretations may circulate, the official text is clear and leaves no room for alternative readings. He dismissed the publication of earlier drafts by activists as irrelevant, stressing that the final agreement, which reflects all of Iran’s concerns and parliament’s requirements, is vastly different from initial proposals.

Iran’s Response to Snapback May Include But Is Not Limited to NPT Withdrawal

The Foreign Minister stated that Iran’s reaction to snapback activation would be decisive, though the form will be determined by the SNSC. Options include, but are not limited to, withdrawal from the NPT. Foreign policy issues, he said, are dynamic and must be decided in accordance with circumstances.

“Military Option” No Solution to Iran’s Nuclear Issue

Araghchi dismissed threats by the European Troika, stressing that military action had failed to resolve the issue, as Iran rebuilt destroyed facilities and retained its indigenous knowledge. He warned that reimposing UN sanctions through snapback would be a grave mistake, only complicating matters without resolving them. While snapback would cause certain damages, it would not be decisive, and Europe would ultimately lose influence in negotiations.

Diplomacy Must Not Be Feared

He reiterated that diplomacy is fluid and should not be avoided. If Resolution 2231 were extended, it would merely provide additional time for diplomacy, though pressures might intensify. Iran, he stressed, has withstood pressures before and will continue to do so.

Agreement with IAEA Is a Cooperation Framework, Not an Action Plan

Responding to questions on Iran’s first commitments under the agreement, Araghchi said the document is a framework, not a timetable. Requests from the IAEA will be referred to the SNSC for evaluation, including for both operational facilities like Bushehr and Tehran’s reactor, and bombed sites under new procedures.

He clarified that responsibility for the nuclear file has always rested with the SNSC. Execution is handled by the Foreign Ministry or Atomic Energy Organization as mandated. Currently, the file is overseen by Secretary Dr. Ali Larijani, following earlier stewardship by Admiral Ali Shamkhani.

Efforts for Release of Mahdieh Esfandiari

Araghchi confirmed ongoing efforts to secure the release of Mahdieh Esfandiari, an Iranian citizen detained in France. Negotiations over a potential prisoner exchange with French detainees in Iran are advancing, though the judiciary and security agencies are also involved.

Netanyahu Has Revealed Israel’s True Face

Commenting on Israeli actions, Araghchi accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of widespread crimes but credited him with exposing Israel’s true nature to the region. He stressed that even states previously allied with the U.S. and Israel now recognize Tel Aviv as the primary regional threat.

He recalled Netanyahu’s vision of “Greater Israel,” encompassing parts of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, and Iraq, as alarming for the region. Israel’s attacks on Gaza, Lebanon, Syria, and Iran underscore its expansionist ambitions.

Extraordinary Arab and Islamic Summit on Gaza

Araghchi announced that President Masoud Pezeshkian will attend the extraordinary Arab and Islamic summit in Doha on September 14–15, convened by Qatar to support Gaza and condemn Israeli actions. He emphasized that beyond statements, Islamic states must adopt concrete measures such as cutting ties with Israel, halting economic cooperation, and imposing sanctions.

Hezbollah’s Arms Issue an Internal Lebanese Matter

The Foreign Minister underlined that Hezbollah is an integral part of Lebanon’s political structure and that decisions regarding its arms should be taken domestically through national dialogue. He warned that Israeli aggression aims to weaken and fragment regional states, citing Syria as an example where Israel expanded its occupation following state weakening.

Araghchi reiterated Iran’s support for Hezbollah while affirming that the final decision lies with the Lebanese people and their leaders.