Nuclear: Iran 'won't compromise rights'

2011-11-09 14:17

Tehran - Iran's envoy to the IAEA said on Wednesday his country "will never compromise its legitimate rights" in pursuing its atomic programme, despite a report strongly suggesting Tehran was engaged in nuclear weapons development.

"As a responsible state, the Islamic republic of Iran will never compromise its legitimate rights and will continue to comply with its commitments under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty," Ali Asghar Soltanieh said, as cited by the official IRNA news agency.

"Iran will continue its peaceful nuclear activities. And, just as many other previous claims were proven baseless, this time also they will not bear any results," he said.

Soltanieh stressed that Iran's nuclear programme was entirely peaceful and that Iran would continue to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, the UN's nuclear watchdog.

His comments came a day after the IAEA released its report saying "credible" evidence existed to suggest Iran had done work towards building nuclear warheads.

Soltanieh, who late Tuesday dismissed the report as "politically motivated", on Wednesday accused IAEA chief Yukiya Amano of making a "historic mistake" in releasing the document.

Amano had displayed "unbalanced, unprofessional and political" behaviour in publishing the report, which contained "false claims" based on information from Iran's arch-foe the United States and other countries, Soltanieh said.

The United States used the report's release to say it would seek to ratchet up pressure on Iran, which is already subject to international sanctions over its nuclear programme.

The IAEA said in its report it had "serious concerns" over information that Iran "has carried out activities relevant to the development of a nuclear explosive device."

Although it stopped short of bluntly accusing Iran of trying to make nuclear weapons, it said it appeared activities had been carried out that included computer modelling of a nuclear warhead, explosives tests, and studying how to arm a medium-range missile with an atomic warhead.

Iran has always maintained that its nuclear programme is for exclusively civilian uses, not military ones.

Its two allies on the UN Security Council, Russia and China, are seen by experts as likely to block any attempt by the IAEA to report Iran to the council in an effort to broaden sanctions.

  • Neil - 2011-11-09 14:40

    I bet Iran will think twice about creating nuclear arms when someone parks an A bomb on their stoep.

      donderwolk - 2011-11-09 15:01


      donderwolk - 2011-11-09 15:26

      dont thumbs down me! why would anybody send a-bombs to an enemy with similiar capabilities? use kim jong il for example, hates s.korea but have never used it on them. its just a deterrent to keep enemies at bay. only reason i can think of why israel and western countries would not want iran to have a-bombs is that it really becomes difficult to bully them around when they have the same muscle as you.

      Iwan - 2011-11-09 15:52

      Yes Donderwolk, but didn't you hear about the classic cold war argument that goes like this: USSR: We can destroy your country 5 times USA: We can destroy your country 8 times.

  • Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 15:17

    America and her Western allies do not have a moral or any other legitimacy on the development and maintainance of nuclear weapons. There is also nothing to suggest that America or her allies are necessarily more responsible about the use of such weapons.

      Adam - 2011-11-09 15:45

      america allows for freedom of religion, freedom of speech and freedom of pretty much anything else. america does not persecute based on the colour of your skin, the god you believe in, or what your opinion is. you are a n00b of note.

      Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 16:12

      You sound like an overtired child looking for attention.

      Fred - 2012-02-08 00:46

      You really are completely ignorant about the differences between a terrorist state and the freer world.

  • Neil - 2011-11-09 15:18

    Well it doesn't look like sanctions against Iran are helping much and Israel will definitely not let them get nuclear weapons, because of the fact that the Iranian president vowed to wipe Israel from the face of the map. So when Israel is gone which I doubt will ever happen, who will be the next target?

      Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 15:25

      The "threat" you mention is the claim that Iran threatened to "wipe Israel off the map", which is all well and good, except that it didn't actually happen and no such threat was ever made. I nonetheless wholly support a pre-emptive strike on the only nuclear power in the Middle East.

      Adam - 2011-11-09 15:50

      you support a pre emptive strike on israel? and when syria, egypt, lebanon and jordan did that in 1967 and israel obliterated them with no help from any foreign countries you complain. get real, honestly your pathetic bias impresses no one, you are such a coffee shop revolutionary, with your nig attitude hiding behind a picture of a man who was about 1000000x more impressive then your self. as for iran not saying, so you think they are innocent because they did not say it? therefore when i show you them saying it you'll change your opinion? obviosly not, you're a joke. viva comrade viva

      Dirk - 2011-11-09 20:50

      I would support a pre-emptive strike on you. Israel has the Sampson option. If they reach a point where they will be annhilated, they will take their enemies with them. A child looking for attention, makes more sense than a deluded fool, following an international murdering terrorist piece of dog faeces.

      Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 22:13

      I see that your bile duct has got the better of your brain.

      Fred - 2012-02-08 00:48

      Mthuthuzeli, or whatever your real name is, you said similar uninformed and delusional things about Gaddafi. Where is he now? Get in touch with reality, buddy. Right now you're way off track.

  • Guy - 2011-11-09 15:19

    Iran has about 10% of world Oil reserves, plus countless reserves of various minerals. Look at a map of the region and you will see Iran sits in between Afghanistan and Iraq, now I'm no military commander, but if I was planning an invasion (under the guise of terror / democracy / capitalism) I would surround my enemy, bomb him to oblivion and then send in the ground troops to clean up...

  • Neil - 2011-11-09 15:38

    Mthuthuzeli, I beg to differ. Look at the following link and then tell me why Iran wants to get nukes so badly?

      Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 15:59

      Ahmedinejad actually say that? I´m no fan of his, but I thought he expressed the desire for Zionism to be wiped off the page of history, like fascism, communism etc. Which is hardly the same thing.

      Fred - 2012-02-08 00:52

      Mthuthuzi, he doesn't differentiate. He and his evil cronies want to eliminate Israel. They believe the holocaust didn't happen. Imagine that.

  • donderwolk - 2011-11-09 15:42

    what makes you think iran does not already have nuclear weapons? the russians still cant account for over 200 warheads that went missing after their collapse? alot of folks have been speculating for years that iran might have aquired them. look, the us economy is falling apart, and its just gov's buying rserves thats keeping them afloat. now they have agreements with the saudis to protect them since nixon, only requirement, sell oil in dollars. the own iraq, kuwaiti's owe them a favour, gadaffi murdered last month, nigerians dont care what kind of money they make as long as they make something. the only "hardegat donner" is amedinejad. what if he decides "hey, i want euro's for my oil"? america would die within a few months barrack got elections coming up so he cant go to war, so let israel do it and we'll send some drones from the us to assist. if israel need more help, US got groundforces sitting on both sides of the fence.

      Neil - 2011-11-09 15:50

      They might have some nukes yes but they also want the capability of making their own. That's why all these deals are being done under the table with Russia and China. No point in having an arsenal, running out and being unable to make your own when you need it.

      donderwolk - 2011-11-09 16:05

      i dont get what the fuss is about..... osama was chilling in pakistan, also a nuclear power but nobody bothered them. pakistan also cant stand india, but they pretending to be okay, nobody is firing anything anywhere. so leave amedinejad to brew his own concoctions.

      Mthuthuzeli - 2011-11-09 16:22

      If Britain requires a nuclear deterrent, why not Iran?

      Fred - 2012-02-08 00:54

      What are you talking about?! This is more nonsense.

  • pages:
  • 1