. . .
Will there be a press briefing after the meeting between Mr. ElBaradei and Mr. Kouchner?

Yes. The luncheon will be followed by a briefing, probably around 2:30 p.m.

There were some reservations in relations between a certain group of countries, especially western, and Mr. ElBaradei about his assessment of the situation in Iran, Iranian cooperation and also the outstanding questions in particular. Is it correct to say that this chapter is closed and that relations between France and Mr. ElBaradei are all rosy now?

We have confidence in the work of the Agency and its director-general.

Are talks still going on to approve a UN resolution to sanction Iran? Why isn't there agreement?

The talks are continuing.

Are there problems preventing us from reaching an agreement?

The talks are continuing in the Security Council. After the last report from Mr. ElBaradei and Mr. Solana's report, the E3 + 3 presented a draft resolution after their meeting Berlin on January 22.

What's France's position because today Ehud Olmert said on leaving his meeting with Angela Merckel that he was convinced the Iranians were developing a military program? And last week, France said that a rocket launched by the Iranians was troubling. Is France changing its position with regard to Iran's nuclear program? . . .

You've already asked this question and I've already answered. I told you of our concern over the Iranians' announcement about launching missiles. And our position on Iran's nuclear programs hasn't changed. It's the E3 + 3 position. We're combining dialogue and firmness. We're keeping up the pressure on Iran by preparing sanctions while remaining open to dialogue. We hope that Iran will finally respond to its obligations set by the international community which I just repeated when I told you about the minister's meeting with Mr. ElBaradei. Our position is consequently unchanged, and let me remind you it's position shared by the six.

There's a difference in appreciation of the value of the agreement in the position established in Berlin. . . Is the agreement still holding among the Six? Isn't it gradually crumbling even as leaks suggest that Mr. ElBaradei's report will be positive for Iran?

I don't think so at all. The agreement is holding. When you speak of different interpretations, that's your analysis, but I don't believe one can say that about the agreement.

Admittedly, at the beginning each side has its own assessment but, precisely, the virtue of the January 22 meeting is that it confirmed the unity among the six who agreed to present a draft resolution providing for additional sanctions in the context of the approach I've just recalled, which combines dialogue with firmness. The agreement of the six on this is very clear.

You say you still have confidence in Mr. ElBaradei. Do you consider the post of IAEA director-general to be a technical one or a political one with all that this entails? Do you grant Mr. ElBaradei the right to talk policy, proliferation and so on?

The post of IAEA director-general is a technical one.

Is that what you're going to talk about tomorrow?

The minister will be discussing several matters with Mr. ElBaradei. We're asking the IAEA director-general and the agency for a technical opinion, specifically about the state of progress in Iran's nuclear program.

Do you suspect Mr. ElBaradei of work that goes beyond the technical side?

There is no suspicion on my part. You asked me a question quite clearly, whether the work of the IAEA and Mr. ElBaradei was technical or political, and I answered equally clearly that the work of the IAEA is technical. There's not the slightest hint of suspicion in my comments.

Do you recognize in Mr. ElBaradei's prerogatives the right to take the Iran nuclear problem from the Security Council and back to the Board of the IAEA?

It is not up to Mr. ElBaradei to decide for the Security Council. We'll see after the minister's meeting with Mr. ElBaradei whether or not this intention you attribute to him can be confirmed. We'll talk about it again.

You said that Mr. ElBaradei has a technical role. But he's received the Nobel prize for peace, the Agency received the Nobel peace prize.

It is perfectly possible, in exercising a technical function, to play a role and have an impact that goes beyond the exercise of this technical function. It is possible, by exercising a technical activity, to help advance peace in the world. There isn't the slightest contradiction between the two, but nevertheless the job is actually a technical one.