[Unoffical translation from Russian]

Question: Can the outcome of yesterday's meeting be seen as a continuation of concessions on the problem of Iran?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: I don't think it's correct to assess the result of yesterday's meeting this way. There is no question of concessions at all in this case. What it's really all about is to prevent a violation of the nuclear nonproliferation regime. The IAEA still monitors in Iran all that which is occurring there in the nuclear field, including uranium enrichment activities. All of this is under IAEA control.

We are concerned that Iran still has not answered many questions that arose over the past nuclear activities of Iran and to which the IAEA wants to receive a reply. The United Nations Security Council supports it in this. The time that has passed since the negotiation proposals were delivered to Iran that presuppose its return to the moratorium on enrichment activities and its replies to the questions that have long since been asked by the IAEA, this time is fairly long - almost a month and a half. I think this is enough to study these proposals. Therefore, we were, of course, profoundly disappointed by the fact that the Iranian negotiators, and Ali Larijani, Secretary of the National Security Council, had failed to give an answer. Especially as, I repeat, in Shanghai President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran told our President that the attitude of his country to the proposals was after all positive, and that Iran was ready for negotiations and would give its answer soon. That was a month ago. Iran was perfectly aware that should there be no answer to these proposals or should it be negative, then we will resume the work that was being conducted in the Security Council in April and at the start of May and was later suspended in order to allow time, more correctly, permit creating conditions for the resumption of negotiations.

So now that we have decided that in the absence of an answer the question must again return to the Security Council, I think this is a sufficiently clear indication that there is no talk about concessions. But I repeat that if the very term "concessions" is regarded in the context of a striving to understand who in this situation will win, then this is a wrong approach. If we begin to be guided by considerations of a falsely understood prestige: we've made an offer, you see, and they haven't listened to - that will no longer be well-considered diplomacy, but diplomacy based on emotions. There ought to be no such thing, and we are not going to be guided by this. As an immediate step, therefore, the Security Council should in its resolution expressly back up the demands the IAEA and its Board of Governors presented to Iran.

Question: The published outcome declaration points out that should Iran refuse to comply, then Article 41 of Chapter VII of the UN Charter will be used. Can we learn about it in greater detail?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Article 41 concerns a possible consideration of economic sanctions. It says in absolutely unambiguous terms that this article does not concern use of force. The document you cite means that we will be working on a resolution that will make the IAEA demands mandatory for Iran. Then Iran will be given some more time for it to think once more.

Question: How much time concretely?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: This is a subject for discussion in the Security Council. The question has already been discussed, so far no one has said anything about any specific timeframe. But the time I think will be sufficient for Iran to weigh up everything once more, to once more understand that the proposals that have been put forward by the Six really meet the interests of Iran's economic development, of the peaceful nuclear energy of Iran and of involving Iran as a full-fledged partner in the dialogue on regional and international problems, including those of security. So that I count on the true value of these proposals being correctly understood.

We are not talking about any economic sanctions now altogether, we're talking about the first step of the Security Council being, as I've already said, support of the IAEA demands on Iran. If we see that the situation does not get better, then we will be thinking. But there is a perfectly clear understanding that any talk of economic sanctions will be proportionate to steps necessary for achieving the chief objective, that of ensuring Iran's cooperation with the IAEA. It's but a field for speculation and a purely hypothetical question at this point. We have to see how the situation evolves further. Sanctions must not be an instrument of punishment, but solely an instrument for achieving the goal of Iran's return to full cooperation with the IAEA.

Question: Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant - is it being viewed as a kind of threat?

Foreign Minister Lavrov: Nobody is viewing Bushehr NPP as a threat. Bushehr NPP and the entire project for its construction, including the return of spent nuclear fuel to Russia, are being viewed as a model for the development of cooperation in this sphere. The construction of the NPP by Russia with Iran is not an object of sanctions and is being carried out in full conformity with international norms for this kind of activity.

. . .