| Publications | France A-Z | France/U.S. Relations | France in the U.S. | News | Aller aux Etats-Unis | Just for Kids | Going to France | Contact |
|
Daily Press Briefing Statements made by [Please note that only the original French text issued by the French Ministry of Foreign Affairs may be considered official.]
IRAN /NUCLEAR ISSUE
Let me read you the communiqué the Foreign Ministry issued yesterday:
“By a vote of 14, and one abstention, the United Nations Security Council adopted a third sanctions resolution against Iran. This resolution expresses, once again, the international community’s concerns about Iran’s nuclear program—concerns recently strengthened by evidence gathered by the IAEA concerning activities that could indicate a military dimension to the Iranian nuclear program.
By refusing to implement the measures successively demanded by the IAEA’s Board of Governors and the Security Council to rebuild trust, Iran has left the international community no choice but to adopt new sanctions. The Security Council is thus formulating a call for vigilance and interdictions affecting several aspects of relations between Iran and the rest of the international community: They include activities by Iranian banks, notably Melli and Saderat, involved in proliferating transfers, the export of dual-use items, and transportation and shipping activities.
But sanctions are not an end in themselves. The resolution also recalls that the Six (China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States) want a negotiated solution, as the six foreign ministers stressed in their joint declaration following the vote. The Security Council resolution recalls the efforts expended by the Six to engage in a dialogue with Iran and, in particular, the ambitious proposal they made in June 2006 providing for cooperation in the area of civilian nuclear power as well as economic and political cooperation if Iran would agree to suspend its sensitive nuclear activities and to negotiate. This proposal remains on the table and we call on Iran once again to seize this opportunity to achieve a solution in the interest of all.”
Q - Do you have a system to evaluate the effectiveness of sanctions against Iran?
As we indicated when we reported to you about the information we had received from the IAEA, we’ve seen that Iran has replied to some of our questions, which shows the effect of the pressure exerted by the sanctions. However, Iran’s answers to date remain utterly incomplete and imprecise. We have strong concerns about the nature of the program Iran is developing. Based on what Iran has indicated to it, the Agency is not able to declare that its nuclear program is not military. The sanctions are effective, but our objective is still a negotiated solution. Sanctions are not an end in themselves. Our approach is based both on dialogue and firmness. We hope for dialogue, and the sanctions are there to lead the Iranians to dialogue, to make them understand that it is in their interest, as in the international community’s.
[…]
Foreign and European Affairs Minister Bernard Kouchner will travel to Brussels on March 6 to take part in the meeting of the North Atlantic Council.
This informal spring session will be devoted to preparations for the Alliance’s Summit of the Heads of State and Government, which will be held in Bucharest on April 2-4.
During this meeting, the main subjects discussed will be current operations, particularly in Afghanistan, as well as the situation in Kosovo, the enlargement bringing in three new countries with a plan of action for accession, anti-missile defense, relations between NATO and the EU, and between NATO and Russia, Ukraine and Georgia.
The foreign minister will notably express the need for the Alliance to develop a real strategy for Afghanistan.
We were deeply saddened to learn of a helicopter accident that claimed the lives of seven members of the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN) and three crew members.
France conveys its condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims and expresses its heartfelt sympathies to the Nepalese authorities and the UN Secretariat.
Like the UN secretary-general, we hail the work of UNMIN personnel in Nepal, whose contribution to the peace process in that country is crucial. More generally, we pay tribute to the commitment of all those working throughout the world to maintain peace and international security under the authority of the United Nations.
Q - Did Colombia know that the FARC spokesperson and representative who was killed was France’s contact in its negotiations for the release of Ingrid Betancourt?
In the context of our mediation efforts—those of Spain, Switzerland and France—we had contacts with Raul Reyes and I can tell you that the Colombians were aware of them.
Q - Aren’t those contacts prohibited? Isn’t the FARC on the EU list of terrorist organizations?
The FARC is indeed a terrorist organization, but in the context of this mediation effort, many contacts were made, directly or indirectly, up until the event that you are aware of and which happened a few days ago.
Q - The French and Canadian media are indicating that France will send soldiers to eastern Afghanistan, and not to the south. Does that mean that France is rejecting Canada’s call for help in Kandahar?
First of all, any decisions on this topic will be announced at the Bucharest Summit by the President. I would also like to remind you that we are already present in Afghanistan. As the President said on November 7 in Washington, “France will remain engaged in Afghansistan as long as it takes because what’s at stake in that country is the future of our values and of the Atlantic Alliance.” We are an important contributor, and for the past year we’ve strengthened our military efforts, particularly in order to support the training of a credible, operational Afghan army—for us that’s a priority. We have four new monitoring teams in the south, we’ve transferred fighter planes to Kandahar, and we are cooperating with the Germans to train security forces.
Q - Is France sympathetic to Canada’s situation and its appeal?
We have certainly heard Canada’s appeal. We are preparing the eventual decisions to be announced in Bucharest.
Q - This morning, Mr. Fillon said that France was offering political asylum to Mr. Yorongar. I would like to know if at the diplomatic level, a process has gotten under way with respect to his arrival in France.
In order for him to be given political asylum, he must ask for it. Then there’s a whole process, and we will follow it if Mr. Yorongar asks for it, as the Prime Minister indicated this morning.
Q - If France grants him the status of political refugee, does that mean that France believes that unarmed opponents are being persecuted and their lives are endangered in Chad?
That’s your interpretation. Today Mr. Yorongar has let us know that he would ask to come to France. We will examine his request if he makes one. A decision will be made that takes all the facts into account. We will examine any request made by Mr. Yorongar with respect to that point and other points. If he asks us, for example, to evaluate his state of health, we will do so.
Q - Beyond that, have you obtained any explanations from Chad’s authorities on Mr. Yorongar’s arrest and on any torture to which he might have been subjected?
We have nothing new to tell you about that. We’ve taken note of the establishment of an international commission of inquiry that should shed light on what happened. We insisted that its composition be international.
Q - The president of the Palestinian Authority has decided to freeze negotiations with Israel because of Israeli attacks against the Palestinians. Do you have any comment on this subject?
The situation is a dramatic one, as we all know. We hope the discussions will resume and that the peace process will move forward.
[…]
Q - On the French-German compromise, France and Germany are offering two interpretations that at first glance seem completely divergent. Ms. Merkel says, “It is the superior stage of the Barcelona process and we are indeed within the EU,” while Prime Minister Fillon says that “the model is the Baltic Union,” i.e., something with no ambition, totally on the sidelines of the European Union that doesn’t even have access to European funding. Can you clarify the situation?
The two things are different. Mr. Fillon mentioned the Baltic Council because it’s an example that can offer inspiration in moving more toward concrete projects. With respect to the Mediterranean Union, I refer you to what the President and the Chancellor said yesterday. They both declared that they had reached an agreement and would continue consulting with our other partners so that the subject would be raised at the European Council on March 13-14. You’ll have to wait until that date. The President said, specifically, “In the coming days, you’ll see that we’ve reached a compromise on this European Union, which we both want. It’s a new project that is based on everything that Barcelona did and excludes no one.”
Q - Will the Mediterranean project have European funding?
That’s part of the discussions. One thing is clear: There will only be access to European funding in accordance with Community procedures, with decisions taken by the Council on the basis of proposals by the Commission.
Q - Mr. Solana is in the Middle East, where he’s visiting Israel and Palestine. Today he’s in Lebanon. Are these consultations aimed at an EU action to resolve the crisis in Lebanon?
Mr. Solana is there to find out on the ground what’s really going on. You know how closely the EU is following this issue. As you noted, Mr. Solana didn’t only go to Lebanon during this trip. With respect to Lebanon, the EU, like France, supports the Arab League plan. It remains the foundation on which we hope a Lebanese president will be able to be elected, the next deadline being March 11.
Q - There’s talk in the press of France’s return within the framework of a European-Arab initiative in Lebanon. Do you have any comment?
As I’ve said, we are attached to the accomplishment of the Arab League’s proposal. We hope that on the basis of that plan, a Lebanese president will be elected. There are no other initiatives today.
[…]
Q - In your statement during yesterday’s press briefing on Lebanon, you supported the idea of sending a new mission to that country’s borders. You also said you expected concrete gestures from the Syrians. What do you mean by that exactly?
With regard to your first point, the reference to a new mission is simply a comment on the UN secretary-general’s report on SCR 1701. We support the secretary-general’s idea of sending a new UN mission. As for your second point, we’ve always said that we expected Syria to make concrete gestures to show its good will, on this subject as on others. We’ve always said that would be the condition for establishing an in-depth dialogue with Syria.
[…]
Q - Another point with respect to your statement: You highlighted the priority being given to the release of an Israeli prisoner, without mentioning Lebanese prisoners. Does that mean the latter isn’t a priority for you?
We would like all prisoners to be released, but the subject exceeds the framework of SCR 1701. We were referring to specific provisions of the report, to which I refer you./.
Embassy of France, March 4, 2008
|
