AP evidence could not easily be rejected

TEHRAN, Aug. 26 (MNA) – Yukia Amano of the IAEA has rejected the authenticity of AP’s recent ‘Big Story;’ however, a US former negotiator insinuates the contrary.

The recent few weeks has seen a culmination of political conflict between the White House and the Capitol Hill over Iran’s nuclear deal with the 5+1 as well as Iran and IAEA’s separate agreement; Congressmen and women demanded that they be informed about the debated deal despite the confidential nature the IAEA attaches to the deal. Seeking to placate the Congress, US government told the Republicans in the House and the Senate that it was obliged by the IAEA regulations not to divulge the contents of the IAEA-Iran agreement.

Amid the political raw over this issue, AP published, on Wednesday August 19, in its ‘big story,’ an evidence purportedly showing that the IAEA had allowed Iran to implement inspections of its own nuclear sites. The IAEA and US State Department have rejected the claims made in the AP big story. Tariq Rauf, former IAEA official, had questioned the authenticity of the report in an interview with US daily Huffington Post on Thursday August 20. Now, Yukia Amano of the IAEA and Iran’s permanent envoy to the Agency Reza Najafi have cast doubts on the authenticity of the evidence.

However, Richard Nephew told Payman Yazdanai of Mehr News International Service in a short interview that AP would not publish any evidence with a tinge of doubt in its authenticity, insinuating that the big story evidence was probably authentic:

AP recently published a document claiming it is the secret agreement between Iran and IAEA. Can such a thing be true?

I suppose it could be, but having not seen the actual official document myself, I am not in a position to offer an opinion if the AP version is the real document or not. 

 

Some experts like Tariq Rauf, Head of SIPRI in Stockholm and former IAEA expert, considered the published document by AP as fake. What would AP seek by such drastic measures?

Well, this is probably beyond my competence to judge. I would assume that the AP would not publish something it thought to be a fake. So, if it is a fake, I would assume they have been fooled too.

 

Considering the fact the agreements between IAEA and states are secret, why the US senators in Congress insist on seeing the agreement between Iran and IAEA?

Just as in Iran, there is a lot of concern about the specific details of the agreement reached in Vienna. I am certain that there is only an honest desire to understand the terms of the deal better by those in the US Congress.

 

What will be the consequences of possible rejection of the nuclear agreement by the Congress for the US?

I believe the consequences of rejection of the deal would be negative for all sides. Sanctions would be intensified and I believe Iran would restart parts of its nuclear program that have been halted or modified by the JCPOA. This would raise tensions in the region, which would be good for no one.

 

News Code 109557

Tags

Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • 5 + 13 =