[Please note that only the original French text issued by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs may be considered official.]

. . .

Q - Mr. Solana decided to contact Mr. Larijani yesterday. Is there anything new on the Iran question?

A - Mr. Solana's spokesperson just confirmed a few hours ago that there would be a meeting between Mr. Solana and Mr. Larijani on April 25. She said that it would be about the conditions for resuming negotiations. I think that it is in this spirit that you must see it. I saw on the Iranian side that they'd announced a resumption of negotiations. They are going a bit fast. On the side of the Six, on Mr. Solana's side, we're not at that stage yet.

We are talking about a meeting, and as you know, Mr. Solana has already met with Mr. Larijani several times lately. He will be seeing him again to get an assessment of what the Iranians are thinking-and keep in mind that for us the context remains the same. In order for there to be a resumption of substantive negotiations there has to be a suspension of enrichment activities. It is the same theme of dual suspension. So the idea is to test the Iranians to see if they have advanced toward this possibility.

Q - So there's nothing new?

A - On the side of the international community, there are the two resolutions you know, SCR 1737 and 1747. Also on Monday, the EU is going to be taking a number of decisions to implement these two resolutions at the EU level. Also we've said that at the same as the sanctions we've left the door open for a resumption of contacts, So we are abiding by what we said by authorizing the resumption of contacts and hoping that there will be some positive movement on the Iranian side.

Q - But there is something new because there are more and more centrifuges in Iran. Is a military option still excluded?

A - With respect to the number of centrifuges, I saw as you did a number of things that were apparently 'leaked' in Vienna.

We'll see what the IAEA says in its report since I would remind you that SCR 1737 was adopted on March 24 and requires a report within 60 days. We'll have a report at the end of May and we'll see that the IAEA says. Obviously it will have to give us a precise and complete review of the latest developments in the Iranian nuclear program and will also have to give us a very rigorous assessment, from a legal point of view, of the level of Iranian cooperation with the IAEA. It's an important point, especially in light of the agreement that exists between Iran and the IAEA. So we're waiting for the report.

Your other question was about a military option-that's another question. We are engaged in a diplomatic process in which the six countries are participating as you know, including the US, and as far as we are concerned we have said repeatedly that a military option was not conceivable.

Q - You say that the level of cooperation with the IAEA has to be evaluated. So it's no longer a matter of suspending sensitive activities?

A - There are two different things. There is the report the IAEA is going to make, which has two main aspects. First, an assessment of the developments in the nuclear program, the number of centrifuges, the IAEA's appreciation. Then the report will have to tell us the level of cooperation between Iran and the IAEA. But the issue of suspension remains on the table of course and is still a very pressing international demand.

Q - Are you concerned about the increase in the number of centrifuges?

A - If it is confirmed and if it is confirmed by the IAEA, it is obviously in itself not a very positive element. At that point the Security Council will have to act accordingly. We have already adopted two resolutions with sanctions, and we're not ruling out others.

Q - In your opinion, activating these thousand centrifuges isn't a major development?

A - The problem is that at this time we've no knowledge of it officially. Things have come out in the press. But there are certain procedures to be respected and we're waiting for the official IAEA report telling us how matters stand. Once we have it, we will draw the consequences. It is obvious that if the installation of so many centrifuges is confirmed, this is an element that would not go in the direction sought by the international community, and the consequences would have to be drawn.

Q - (…) The French are being very active in anti-Iranian resolutions, and this has been noted in public opinion . What role are the French seeking to play in Iran's history?

A - That's almost a philosophical question. We've always said very clearly that there was no hostility on our part towards the Iranian people and the Iranian government. France has the utmost respect for the Iranian people and its history. We have, as you know, a fairly long tradition of cooperation with Iran and we are quite ready to have dialogue with Iran.

As you saw--it was announced from Teheran--our director for North Africa and the Middle East, Mr. Felix-Paganon, is currently in Iran where he's been meeting with the authorities on both bilateral relations and regional issues. So there is no hostility, no animosity towards Iran.

Simply, there is a question which is important for the entire world-the nuclear issue. We are shouldering our responsibilities as are the other members of the Security Council like Russia, China and others. We have expressed our concern and we've adopted resolutions. Once again, it is not being done to be aggressive or punitive towards Iran but simply out of the wish to make Iran understand that there is a problem and it has to be resolved.

We are open to the idea of Iran developing civilian nuclear energy providing it is done with guarantees of transparency that are satisfactory for the international community. Iran is a signatory of the Non-Proliferation Treaty so it has the possibility of acquiring civilian nuclear energy. This is something we respect entirely, but with guarantees.

. . .