. . .

Of course, the major strategic crisis we are facing today is the question of Iranian nuclear power. France's position is clear and unambiguous: Under the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, Iran-and I am weighing my words-does not have the right to try and acquire a nuclear weapon, although the Iranians do have the sovereign right to acquire civilian nuclear capability. But everybody knows that there are too many suspicions about Teheran's real intentions. It's a risk we cannot take.

Through its support for Hezbollah and through its president's unacceptable remarks on the Holocaust and the existence of Israel, the Iranian regime has made itself an outlaw nation. The prospect of such a regime armed with weapons as destructive as nuclear missiles is terrifying. It would open the way to a murderous arms race in the region, as other countries would want to take the plunge themselves. That's the first risk. It would also be a constant threat to Israel's existence. History has shown us the consequences of complacency in the face of aggression and fundamentalism. Resolving this question will demand the utmost firmness and the greatest unity. Diplomacy, Mr. Ambassador, must be our main weapon, although I believe we must leave all options open in order for diplomacy to work.

The debate on the Iranian nuclear program, taken up by other countries that are themselves considering uranium enrichment programs, must prompt the international community to take strong action on the world nuclear market. Like Pierre Lellouche, I am convinced that this energy source (I mean uranium) will continue to represent a major solution for the future when we are faced with a shortage of fossil fuel. So, my dear Pierre, I would like to make a proposal: Why not create a World Bank for nuclear fuel under the auspices of the IAEA? The nuclear nations would contribute to it financially or in kind, and it would guarantee shipments of civilian nuclear fuel as well as the reprocessing of fissile materials to all nations that desire to develop nuclear energy for peaceful purposes while naturally renouncing the military nuclear option. It seems to me that in this way, the international community, represented by the IAEA, would offer all the guarantees of secure access to the benefits of nuclear energy without the risk of it being hijacked for military ends. Moreover it deprives certain potential proliferating nations of the pretext-and it is a pretext-that they have the right to civilian nuclear energy and energy independence. Since there's a debate, let's guarantee all the countries in the world access, through an international agency, to nuclear materials to develop a civilian nuclear program. And at the same time, we would be guaranteed that such civilian nuclear programs would not be hijacked for nuclear purposes.

. . .