Further JCPOA steps imperative to meet Iran’s demands: MP

TEHRAN, Nov. 01 (MNA) – Iran will continue to roll back its commitments under the 2015 nuclear deal – known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action – since it is a vital move to make the other parties to the deal fulfill their obligations, an Iranian lawmaker said.

“We signed the JCPOA to maintain our national interests; so, if the other parties to the deal do not respect their obligations, we will definitely take further steps to reduce our commitments under the deal,” Deputy Chairman of Parliament's National Security and Foreign Policy Committee Kamal Dehghani Firouzabadi told Mehr.

Referring to the consecutive confirmations by the International Atomic Energy Agency over Iran’s nuclear activities, the lawmaker called on the other parties to the deal to gear up the efforts to meet their obligations and stand up against the US’ unilateral pressures on Iran.

Iran and the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council – the United States, France, Britain, Russia and China – plus Germany signed the JCPOA on July 14, 2015 and started implementing it on January 16, 2016.

Under the deal, Iran undertook to put limits on its nuclear program in exchange for the removal of nuclear-related sanctions.

However, US President Donald Trump pulled his country out of the international nuclear deal in May last year and stepped up sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

Since May, Iran has rowed back on its nuclear commitments twice in compliance with articles 26 and 36 of the JCPOA.

Iran says its reciprocal measures will be reversible as soon as Europe finds practical ways to shield the Iranian economy from unilateral US sanctions, which were imposed last year when Washington withdrew from the nuclear deal.

The European signatories to the JCPOA have so far failed to uphold their commitments. They have expressed vocal support for the deal, but failed to provide meaningful economic incentives as required under the nuclear agreement.


News Code 151791


Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha