INSUBCONTINENT EXCLUSIVE:
activities by Iran in Marivan, Varamin and Turquzabad, saying the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is regretfully considering
find any technical reasons for the presence of such uranium particles, it would reasonably imply that possibly external elements (sabotage)
Republic of IranGOV/2022/26 of 30 May 2022A: General comments:1
The Islamic Republic of Iran is complying completely with its obligations under its Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement (INFCIRC/214) through
Also, in light of further cooperation with the Agency, Iran agreed to conclude in two occasions the joint statements of 26 August 2020 and 5
March 2022, the provisions of which were fully implemented by the Islamic Republic of Iran.3
The locations referred to in the current report of the DG is based upon allegations posed by an ill-intended third party- namely Zionist
regime- which has no legal ground
It should be noted that pursuant to the principles of International Law "pacta tertiis nec nocent nec prosunt", that means "treaties neither
obligate nor benefit third parties", also Article 34 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties between States and International
Organizations that stipulates: "a treaty cannot create rights and obligations for a third party without its consent", a non-party of
safeguards agreement without adhering to such instruments, cannot exploit some of the rights and benefits mentioned in the agreement and use
it against any party in order to raise any allegation and involve the Agency in endless investigation.B: Comments on the report,
nuclear material and nuclear-related activities in Iran that had not been declared to the Agency and requested responses to these questions
from Iran, pursuant to Article 69 of the Safeguards Agreement and Article 4.d
obligations under the CSA (Comprehensive Safeguards Agreement) with the ones under the AP (Additional Protocol).- As explained by Iran
frequently, there has never been any undeclared location in Iran which is required to be declared under the CSA
Therefore, mentioning these issues and expressing "concern" by the Agency in this regard is baseless.- The Agency's requests were not
initially considered by Iran, because:The Agency's requests were not supported by required authentic information, documents and evidences,
Lavizan-Shian site had been granted to the Agency in 28 June 2004
The Agency took environmental samples including soil and plants at this location
about the razing of the Lavisan-Shian, in August 2005, finally it was reported by the Agency in GOV/2005/67 that the information provided by
Iran appeared to be coherent and consistent with its explanation of the razing of the Lavisan- Shian.3
mere finding natural uranium particles in the collected environmental samples cannot be considered as an indication that a quantity of
nuclear material had been present at these locations, while the Agency incorrectly concluded that nuclear material had been present at this
location without taking into account other possible causes.As it was frequently explained to the Agency, its claims have no legal basis and
are audacious accusations
In fact, there is no undeclared nuclear material in Iran, and the Agency assertion is merely based on false and fabricated information
provided by illegitimate Zionist regime that itself possesses nuclear weapons.- In its deliberations with the Agency, Iran has explained its
assumptions about probable causes of the presence of uranium particles in the locations reported by the Agency
Iran has exhausted all its attempts so as to discover the origin of such particles
Given the fact that Iran could not yet find any technical reasons for the presence of such uranium particles, it would reasonably imply that
possibly external elements (sabotage) have been involved in the contamination of those locations.4
As a result, in a letter dated 14 January 2022, the Agency informed Iran that while it had not been able to identify the disc from amongst
those stored at JHL, it could not exclude that the disc had been melted, re-cast and was now part of the declared nuclear material inventory
It should be mentioned that:- The claim about existing another undeclared location containing natural uranium in the form of a metal disc is
based on the same false and fabricated assertions of illegitimate Zionist regime without any ground.- Iran has stated frequently that the
uranium metal had been produced previously only in Jaber Ibne Hayyan (JHL) which has been verified many times by the Agency since 2003 and
Therefore, this project was wholly verified by the Agency in the past and the issue was resolved
It is regrettable that the Agency reopens a closed issue dating back to 2003-2004 based on unauthentic information.- Although all nuclear
material pertaining to this project has been under the Agency seals since 2003, it is very unfortunate that the Agency has occasionally
that the disc had been melted, re-cast and was now part of the declared nuclear material inventory at JHL", but once again based on
unauthentic information, in this report has changed its conclusion and looks for an assumable disc in a nowhere location!C
Iran on 19 March 2022 and found that it was predominantly information that Iran had previously provided to the Agency but also included new
information, which was subsequently assessed by the Agency
It should be mentioned that:- In accordance with the agreed Joint Statement, on 4 April 2022 and within the determined time table, the
Islamic Republic of Iran has provided the Agency with all required information requested by the Agency concerning the identified locations,
which as it was said, have been under the control of private sector
It should be reiterated that the Islamic Republic of Iran has fulfilled all its commitments in this respect and addressed all Agency's
questions in a very cooperative manner.Comments on the Agency evaluations related to each Location:1
is irrelevant and unknown for Iran since the Agency had named until recently this location as "Abadeh"
(see para 41of the 2015 report).- In reply to the Agency questions regarding this location, Iran repeatedly has responded that it gives no
value to questions derived from fabricated information provided by illegitimate Zionist regime.- The Agency has claimed that it has provided
These documents claimed by the Agency are only two images from an unknown location which cannot be regarded as authentic evidence at all,
because they are easily producible thus have no legal and technical value.- The Agency's reference to the presence of neutron detectors in
this location, principally has no safeguards and even AP ground
Despite this fact and although the Agency's questions were not based on authentic information relevant to the purpose of safeguards for its
request of access to these locations, the Islamic Republic of Iran based on its good-will, voluntarily granted access to the Agency and
provided explanations regarding complete history, usage and even the application of bunkers.- In spite of these extensive cooperation, the
Agency has considered the information received from Iran as being inconsistent with the said alleged documents, simply by unjustifiably
relying on some unauthentic and fabricated documents and drawing fallacious and invalid conclusion upon its own wrongly shaped assumptions.-
Iran has merely reflected the relevant history of the location without referring or linking it to such contamination to a foreign company
It is quite natural that the concerned Member State was not able to find any information about its company's activities after half a century
Therefore, the Agency's conclusion on the explanation of Iran is not correct and substantially defendable.- This location was used for the
exploitation of fireclay through a contract with a foreign company decades ago
However, the Agency baselessly alleged that the location has been involved in nuclear activities
The Agency's allegations that this location has conducted explosive experiments with protective shielding in preparation for the use of
neutron detectors is merely a fantasy based on false and unauthenticated information
This conclusion is absolutely false, unrealistic and biased.- The Agency's making linkage between Lavizan-Shian and the so called Marivan
based on unauthentic and fabricated picture of detector is also baseless.- The origin of presence of depleted uranium with U-236 mentioned
are commercially available in the market
It should not be difficult for the Agency which claims to having a rich library of the characteristics of particles to substantiate their
origins.- Other possible origin of reported particles by the Agency could be result of subversive acts (sabotage)
It should not be forgotten that the Islamic Republic of Iran has been subjected to numerous sabotage acts in various locations repeatedly by
Turquzabad during mid-July and mid-August 2018 through the analysis of commercially available satellite imagery is merely inaccurate and
unprofessional for claiming that items were being removed from Turquzabad
Such commercially satellite imagery cannot provide a valid base for a deduction like that
similarities of trucks in these two different locations seen through the commercial satellite imagery as a reason to claim that the same
truck moving from one location to another.- Unfortunately, the Agency considers all fabricated documents and fake information provided by
of the possible use or storage of nuclear material and/or conduct of nuclear-related activities, including research and development
activities related to the nuclear fuel cycle, at Location 3 in Iran (a location known as Varamin)" which is not supported by valid proofs,
is misleading.- The said paragraph mentioning that "This location also underwent significant changes in 2004, including the demolition of
most buildings", is not correct
The fact is that due to changing the usage and application of this location, only one building among the complex of existing buildings was
demolished and reconstructed in 2004
Furthermore, reconstruction of one building in this location neither should be regarded as sanitization activities nor need to be mentioned
In spite of explaining this fact to the Agency, unfortunately the Agency ignored Iran's explanations
Since the Agency has not presented authentic documents to Iran concerning its claim on "possible undeclared nuclear material and
nuclear-related activities", it should not be expected for Iran to consider unauthentic and fabricated documents as any Safeguards and
Additional Protocol basis to respond the Agency's requests
Despite this, Iran voluntarily granted access and provided information and clarification to the Agency on this location.- It was explained
to the Agency that the initial activities conducted in this location had been exploitation of sodium sulphate from the soil and water of the
surrounding region by traditional method, which was subsequently shifted to industrial process in the next phase
Afterwards, due to municipal regulations, the operation of the location was halted and converted to farming and cattle raising
It is a matter of surprise that the Agency insists on its incorrect conclusion based on unauthentic and fabricated documents.- Since there
have never been any nuclear-related activities in this location, the Agency's report on the presence of particles does not have any
justification, rather than sabotage acts of scenario-composing by the well-known enemies of the Islamic Republic of Iran
As pointed out before, sabotage acts of all kinds have frequently impacted various locations in many instances and occasions in Iran by its
enemies.- The Agency's claim that "containers removed from Varamin at the time of the dismantlement of the buildings at the location were
eventually transferred to Turquzabad" is improvable and unverifiable, and is not a professional and reliable assessment.- Unfortunately, the
Agency once again here considers all fabricated documents and fake information provided by the Israeli regime totally as authentic, and has
storage of nuclear material and equipment", is not based on authentic information and documents
The area in question is actually an industrial place encompassing various kinds of warehouses and depots for storing detergents, chemicals,
foodstuff, fabrics - textiles, vehicles tires and parts, tubes and joints, and some industrial scraps; therefore there had not been any
ground for this location to be declared to the Agency.- Furthermore, the request of the Agency from Iran to provide information on the
moving containers from one location to another, as well as the so-called sanitization activities in this location which is an area for
industrial scraps storage and dealing, has no any Safeguards and Additional Protocol relevance
Therefore, the Agency question is fundamentally baseless
background of activities carried out in this location, we did not find the origin of the particles reported by the Agency
There has not been any nuclear activity or storage in this location
Therefore, no technical clue concerning the origin of reported particles were found
However, the possibility of presence of such particles by sabotage cannot be excluded.- Unfortunately, the Agency again and again considers
all fabricated documents and fake information provided by the Israeli regime totally as authentic, and has concluded that Turquzabad issue,
The Islamic Republic of Iran has so far rendered its full cooperation even beyond its obligations under the CSA and the AP to the Agency
It has to be re-emphasized that all Iran's nuclear material and activities have been completely declared to the Agency and has gone through
a very robust verification system
It should be noted that during the last 20 years the most intensive Agency inspections has been conducted in Iran, which has been confirmed
by the Agency in its the SIR 2021, as it says that 22% of its inspections worldwide have been conducted in Iran; whereas Iran possesses only
%3 of all nuclear facilities covered by the Agency throughout the world.2
The Islamic Republic of Iran strongly expects that the Agency conduct its reporting on verification activities in the Islamic Republic of
Iran in a professional and impartial manner without extraneous political pressures.3
Though having no obligation to respond to the questions raised by the Agency based on fabricated and unauthentic documents, Iran, on
voluntary and cooperative basis, has provided all needed information, supporting documents and accesses to respond to the Agency's requests
Iran could have refrained from granting access and providing information and supporting documents if it had no intention to cooperate with
the Agency on these questions
Unfortunately, the Agency's insistence on the validity of the fabricated documents has resulted in an invalid and unjust assessment.4
The Agency should not disregard the possibility of involvement of Iran's staunch enemies in providing false and fabricated information to it
and at the same time their role in possible perpetration of intentional contaminating of the locations in question, especially when they
themselves repeatedly announce their intentions to disrupt entirely peaceful nuclear activities of Iran and attempts to undermine
cooperation between Iran and the Agency
nuclear program in recent years, in which they have credited such sabotages to themselves.5
The Agency by referring to the above-said invalid information has overshadowed unfairly all Iran's cooperation with the Agency and its
transparent peaceful nuclear activities
This approach does not match with the extensive cooperation of Iran with the Agency and the implementation of the most robust verification
system being applied on Iran by the Agency
The Islamic Republic of Iran would like to seriously warn about the negative impact of such an approach on the overall existing constructive
environment in its cooperation with the Agency.
