Ali Larijani Quotations

We have said long before that the matter of research is not part of the negotiation, research has its own meaning and it has nothing to do with producing fuel industrially.

Negotiations are welcome, either with Europeans or non-Europeans, but all these countries should only act as a catalyst for swiftly settling the nuclear dispute within the IAEA regulations.

If they set a deadline, it will, from Iran's point of view, make no difference from being referred to the U.N. Security Council and Iran will react in the same manner.

But they are not going to talk to us in the language of threats.

If Iran's case is referred or reported to the Security Council Iran's co-operation will decrease.

If we are referred to the U.N. Security Council, we will review our stance on the additional protocol.

Going to the Security Council will certainly not make Iran go back on research and development.

His motivation for making such comments is unclear to us. But adopting a logical stance towards Iran's nuclear activity, better serves the interest of the region.

It is an idea, not a structured proposal, we don't see it as mature and it has serious problems.

It is better for France to use its position to solve the issue, complicating the situation is easy, but diplomats should refrain from harsh comments.

Referring Iran's file to the Security Council won't change the Iranian stance about uranium enrichment. It serves no one's interest.

The aim of our negotiation with Russia and the EU was to preserve and maintain the research we have started, and in an appropriate way preserve the rights of all Iranians... (Iran) will not give in to any intimidation and referral to the UN Security Council.

Who does the EU-3 represent in the negotiations? Is it the (IAEA) board of governors, the EU, the United Nations or themselves?

We hope that the new Palestinian government overcomes its current problems with the help of Islamic countries, including Iran.

It seems that in the world of politics, lying is not such a big deal.

Reporting Iran's dossier to the UN Security Council will be unconstructive and the end of diplomacy.

The Russian proposal over Iran's uranium enrichment program is considerable, but it has some problems and ambiguities to be clarified in future talks.

Europeans should pay more attention. Iran has called for dialogue and is moving in the direction of reaching an agreement through peaceful means.

Repeatedly and frankly we have announced that in Irans national security doctrine there is no room for atomic and chemical weapons as we consider them against Islamic laws. Irans Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei) in this connection had issued a decree that mass destruction weapons are prohibited by the Muslim religion. [. . .] Therefore we support the idea of a Middle East free from weapons of mass destruction[.]

That Iran is willing to threaten Israel is wrong[. . . .] We pose no threat and if we are conducting nuclear research and development we are no threat to Israel. We have no intention of aggression against any country. [. . .] Today we announce to you that the political will of Iran is aimed at the negotiated settlement of the case and we dont want to aggravate the situation in our region[. . . .] We know that this issue can be settled in a constructive dialogue and we welcome that.

I really and definitely think that France has the capability to come forward. The EU should maintain their own position, without influence.

Iran welcomes dialogue with any other states. I wrote a letter to the three European states inviting them to resume talks, but, they cancelled it. They had thought that Iran would no longer resume talks with them.

If the nuclear dossier is referred to the U. N. Security Council, Iran will have to resume uranium enrichment.

We cannot just forever drop the idea of uranium enrichment at home, especially when we have both the uranium and the technical know-how inside the country.

The most logical way was to have the case with the agency and to have the agency's supervision.

Some people inside Iran believed that Iran's negotiating partners should not be limited to three European countries, although they can remain a part of the issue.

There will be definite changes regarding the negotiating methods and the political conditions currently governing the negotiations.

It's not logical for a country to put the fate of its nation at the disposal of another country even if it's a friend. You can meet part of your fuel needs from abroad.

I want to say that the process of enrichment is the sovereign right of any country. You should not take away this right from nations which have a peaceful nuclear program, which consequently, includes also enrichment.

The Islamic Republic is serious in its intentions to master peaceful atom and considers it its legal right. We acknowledge that peaceful nuclear technology development should be carried out under IAEA supervision and are ready to closely cooperate with it in this direction.

If you use the language of force, Iran will have no choice but to ... leave the framework of the NPT ... and to resume enrichment.

Inside Iran, too, the public opinion and the elite saw many serious faults with these talks. On what basis or logic have Iran's nuclear talks been limited to, and conditional upon, the three European governments?

Iran has the absolute right to enrich. Meanwhile, the other side has proposed that for a while the issue of enrichment could be resolved in a different way. This is worth discussing. I think we can reach an agreement that could suit today's circumstances.

Iran has prepared itself ... they will get a crushing response if they make such a mistake.

Iran will however, only consider the technical and legal aspects of the report and pay no attention at all to the political parts.

Iran will continue to cooperate with the agency, even though its report launched some criticisms on us which have no legitimate or technical bases.

Iran will continue activity aimed at mastering peaceful nuclear technologies under the supervision of IAEA specialists and will convince the Agency that this activity is peaceful and transparent.

A moratorium is necessary when there is something dangerous. But all our activities are transparent.