IRAN/NUCLEAR QUESTION

There's to be a meeting this afternoon at the International Conference Center. Taking part are the German, British and French political directors and their American, Chinese and Russian counterparts. The secretariat general of the Council of the European Union will also be represented.

The meeting has three objectives:

1/ To allow all the participants to give their reactions to Mr. ElBaradei's report which came out on April 28. There will be a briefing on the assessment of the Iranian program as it appears from the AIEA report. The participants will discuss the developments regarding uranium conversion and enrichment and all the outstanding questions which the IAEA director general called attention to and which have not been answered.

2/ To discuss the next stages. We would like to see the UN Security Council, through a resolution, send a firm and united message to Iran. The European countries will present certain ideas to their partners to this end. The aim is to reinforce the authority of the IAEA, which must remain at the center of the arrangements, by giving binding force to the Agency's demands, particularly those dealing with the suspension of activities to do with uranium enrichment and reprocessing.

3/ To consider together, parallel to the work in the Security Council, incentives and dissuasive measures involving all the states at the meeting.

This meeting, at the level of high-ranking officials, is in preparation for the meeting that is to be held at ministerial level in New York on May 9.

Q - Are the political directors going to be taking decisions or are they just conferring?

The meeting this evening is a meeting of high-ranking officials, and the aim is to exchange views among the six participating countries. We had Mr. ElBaradei's report Friday, now we need to exchange analyses about the report. We're also going to be discussing the next stages. What's going to happen in the Security Council? The Europeans already have certain ideas which they wish to share with the other participants at the meeting.

And then lastly we have to consider, as the minister said earlier, negative and positive measures, incentives and dissuasive ones, which allow us to respond favorably to Iran if Iran complies with the demands of the international community or to envision measures of another kind if Iran fails to respond to the Security Council demands.

Q - The Iranians said they'd agree to negotiate if the question is withdrawn from the Security Council.

What's important in this process is that it can evolve and it's reversible. We're going to the Security Council to reinforce the IAEA's authority. But if the Iranians decided at some point to comply with the obligations required of them by the international community and decide to return to the negotiating table, obviously the process can be reversed as we've said several times.

Q - In an interview this morning the Iranian foreign minister refused categorically to suspend uranium enrichment. Is that likely to influence today's meeting?

The demand for suspension has been made repeatedly in IAEA board of governors' resolutions. It was made about a month ago in a Security Council presidential statement. Now it's going to be discussed in the Security Council and it will probably be taken up in a Security Council resolution. This proves there is a very strong degree of unity in the international community on this objective and on the demand being made to Iran, and we hope that Iran heeds this unity, the unanimity in the international community.

Q - There isn't a very strong degree of unity in the international community because the Russians and Chinese actually have a different position from France, Germany, Britain and the United States.

There's very strong unity about the objective. Everyone believes Iran should not have nuclear weapons and everyone believes Iran must respond to the international demands. When you look at the statements made by all the countries I've just named, I don't believe there is any difference or divergence among them. Next, the question is going to be one of diplomatic tactics about the next stages. The international community usually has this type of discussion. Once again, as to the objective there's very strong unity among the participants.

Q - With regard to the measures to be taken, the Russians and Chinese are apparently opposed to sanctions.

That's precisely the purpose of this afternoon's meeting-to see what position the Russians and Chinese have on this question and on others. I don't want to anticipate the results.

Q - If an agreement were to come out of this meeting, might the vote on a resolution be before the May 9 meeting or afterwards?

I can't anticipate the results there either. We're talking about a six-party meeting-the EU3, the Russians, Chinese and Americans. It's an informal meeting, a working meeting. It's not a meeting at which decisions are going to be taken. If a general sense emerges, there'll then be discussions in New York among the Security Council members, not all of whom are in Paris today. At that point we'll have to work with all the Security Council members, and our objective is to get a resolution as quickly as possible. And there's this ministerial-level meeting which is scheduled to be held in New York on May 9 in the same format.

Q - What's France's position on the question?

France's position is not very different from the rest of the international community. We all have the same objective which is to see that Iran does not acquire nuclear weapons, that it complies with the international demands, and at the same time we want to give Iran the means to develop a civil nuclear program. That's something no one contests, and the message must be very clear for the Iranian people: no one disputes Iran's right to develop a civil nuclear program-everyone agrees on that.

So now we're going to see how the international community can incorporate its demands in the Security Council to reinforce the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Agency remains a central element, and the matter will not be removed from its authority. We simply wish to strengthen its authority and to ensure that it has the means to work in satisfactory conditions, and we hope this message will be heeded by the Iranian leaders and the Iranian people because it's not directed against them. We sincerely want to cooperate with Iran to enable it to develop a civil nuclear program, but that presupposes that Iran complies with the international demands.

Q - You said before that France's position was not very different to that of the others. Is there something particular about France's position?

I don't see any particularity in France's position. France, with Germany and the UK, took the initiative from the beginning to hold these talks with Iran. It did so with the support of the European Union and the international community. All the demands that were made were taken up by the IAEA board of governors. There was the Security Council statement. So there's nothing particular about France's position in this matter. We simply wish to preserve the unity of the international community. That means that we're in a position where we're going to work with various parties to reach a text which suits everyone in the international community.

Q - What comes next after the May 9 meeting?

We can't say today what it will be. We'd like to see a resolution adopted by the Security Council, but I can't say when it will be adopted.

Q - Under chapter 7?

It's one of the points that will be discussed with our partners. As I've said, we wish to give binding force to the demands of the international community. To do this, one of the possibilities is certainly recourse to chapter 7 of the UN Charter.

. . .