Iran's Permanent Representative to int'l organizations based in Vienna Kazem Gharibabadi

Tehran (IP) - Iran's permanent representative to international organizations based in Vienna reacted to the IAEA Director General's report on Iran's failure to allow the re-installation of surveillance cameras at the Tessa complex in Karaj and called the request beyond the agreement of the two sides in a joint statement.

Iran PressIran news: Kazem Gharibabadi tweeted: "It's deeply regrettable that after 3 terrorist attacks to Iran's nuclear facilities during the past year, the Agency has not yet condemned them, as it is required to do so by GC & GA resolutions and even for the sake of its own equipment, safety and security of its inspectors."

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director-General Rafael Grossi said in a report on Sunday night that from September 20 to 22, IAEA inspectors have been allowed to service surveillance equipment and replace camera memory cards in all necessary locations in Iran except the centrifuge workshop in Tessa Complex in Karaj.

The report comes as Iran's representative to the IAEA has previously said that the IAEA has no obligation to report on expired mutual understandings and record data.

In this regard, Gharibabadi once again recalled the content of the September 12 joint statement of the President of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) and the Director-General of the IAEA, noting that in the meetings in Tehran and recently in Vienna, it was clearly stated that as the security and judicial investigations into the Tessa Complex in Karaj are ongoing, the complex's surveillance equipment is not under IAEA's technical service.

Iran has never accepted the IAEA's new approach to cite alleged reports, emphasizing its legal and sound arguments; However, due to the belief in the need for continuous interaction with the Agency, Iran holds the path of cooperation open, but the IAEA appears to be taking steps to step up US and Western pressure on Iran by raising new questions and ambiguities.

Grossi's new report also shows from this perspective that the Agency has distanced itself from the technical procedure in matters contrary to the principle of the Agency's impartiality in the assigned missions.

There are some reasons for this, which have raised doubts about how the Agency monitors.

In a note assessing the Islamic Republic of Iran's concerns about the granting of such access, the former French Ambassador to Tehran, François Nicolas said: "For Iranians, the "double addendum protocol" is associated with attacks on Iran's nuclear facilities with Stuxnet malware, assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists, and the experience of spies infiltrating previous IAEA inspections in other countries, such as Iraq."

Gareth Porter, an American analyst and researcher writes in a note on the history of the Israeli regime's use of information about international organizations, including the IAEA, to assassinate Iranian scientists: "Iran has good reason to believe that Israel can access the information gathered from IAEA interviews with Iranian scientists and plan further assassinations."

Obviously, according to IAEA oversight principles, Iran is not required to comply with obligations beyond safeguards. If it voluntarily confiscates this data, it does not mean that Iran has made an obligation to the IAEA that the IAEA wants to refer to as a technical right and has demanded from the Islamic Republic of Iran.

It is emphasized that the Iranian representative to the international organizations based in Vienna considered the Agency's request to Iran beyond the agreement of the two sides in a joint statement.


Read more:

Gharibabadi censures inaccurate IAEA report