New agreement needed for reviving JCPOA: Grossi

TEHRAN, Dec. 17 (MNA) – Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency claimed that reviving Iran’s nuclear deal under US President-elect would require striking a new agreement as the situation has changed a lot compared to the past.

In an interview with Reuters, Rafael Grossi claimed that there had been too many breaches for the agreement to simply snap back into place.

“I cannot imagine that they are going simply to say, ‘We are back to square one’ because square one is no longer there,” Grossi said in continuation of his claim.

“It is clear that there will have to be a protocol or an agreement or an understanding or some ancillary document which will stipulate clearly what we do,” he added.

Referring to Iran's measures to reduce JCPOA commitments after the US unilateral withdrawal from the agreement and failing of European parties in implementing of their commitment, he said, “There is more (nuclear) material, ... there is more activity, there are more centrifuges, and more are being announced. So what happens with all this? This is the question for them at the political level to decide."

Theses claims came as the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency in an interview with CBS News on Wednesday criticized US withdrawal from the Nuclear Deal and said that Iran wants security and stability in the entire world.

“Iran is moving on with its nuclear program. As you know, this is not working or operating in a vacuum. This is done in the framework of an agreement, which was signed by the P5 [the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: US, UK, France, Russia, and China] plus Germany [and] the European Union back in 2015,” he said.

“You remember that the United States withdrew from this agreement back in 2018, a couple of years ago, and then from that moment on, Iran, as a reply, as a response to this, decided to gradually start diminishing its compliance with this agreement,” he underlined. 


News Code 167292


Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha