France is blocking a ‘peaceful deal’ by referring to false Israeli claims, and this is a historical mistake it is making, an Iranian policymaker and scholar, Seyed Hossein Mousavian, told RT.
RT:The French Foreign minister has said that the last round of Israel’s concerns must be considered during the nuclear talks. How will this impact the outcome of the upcoming talks next week then?
Seyed Hossein Mousavian: France has blocked a peaceful deal because of Israeli claims. I think this is a historical mistake France is making because if you read the records, in 1992 Israel claimed Iran would possess nuclear bomb in 1995, in 1995 they claimed Iran would possess nuclear bomb in 1999, then they claimed Iran would possess nuclear bomb in 2003. It is for 20 years they are giving timetables that Iran would possess a nuclear bomb in one year, two years or three years. Therefore, this has been proven to the international community that Israel is lying. I don’t really understand why France is going to block such a peaceful deal based on such false claims of Israelis.
RT:Furthermore, Hollande says that France won’t lift any sanctions and restrictions until it’s sure “Iran is not seeking to build a bomb”. What’s about the last weeks’ IAEA report that the nuclear program is virtually frozen. That doesn’t provide any assurance to France at all, does it?
SM: First of all, the IAEA has had about 5,000 mandated inspections over Iranian nuclear program and frequently has announced there is no evidence of diversion towards organization. This is clear. But I really doubt that the real concern of France is about nuclear bomb because France has strategic relations with Israel, when Israel is not a member of NPT and possesses about 400 nuclear bombs, therefore France should not be concerned about nuclear bombs. France helped Israel to muster nuclear bomb, France helped India to muster nuclear bomb, France helped Pakistan to muster nuclear bomb, France even gave nuclear reactor to Iraq in 1980s. France has a very, very bad record.
RT:Is it playing double standards, as far as you concern?
SM: First of all, it is double standard. Second, the claim about nuclear bomb with their behavior is completely different. They know Iran doesn’t have a nuclear bomb, they know that in 10 years of inspection, there is no evidence of any kind of diversion in Iranian nuclear program, but they [imply] sanctions on Iran because Iran doesn’t have nuclear bomb and they are relying on Israel, while Israel has 400 nuclear bombs.
RT:From the Israeli side , the Israel’s prime minister Netanyahu said a bit earlier that in fact, rather than easing any restrictions, restrictions should be tighter, sanctions should be even tighter on Iran to get a tighter deal. Bad mistake, as far as you concern, right?
SM: Look at the result of the sanctions. There has been Israeli position for more coercion, more pressure, and more sanctions on Iran because more pressure would push Iran to give up its nuclear program. This is Israeli position since 6-7 years ago. Look at the result: before sanctions imposed on Iran in 2006 it had about 3,000 centrifuges, after sanctions Iran now has about 19,000 centrifuges, before sanctions Iran was enriching below 5%, after sanctions Iran is enriching up to 20%, before sanctions Iran had a few hundred kilograms of stockpile of enriched uranium, now Iran has about 8,000 kilograms of a stockpile. This is the result of sanctions. Practically Israelis are pushing the international community to push Iran for increasing its capacity, and level and capability [of] its nuclear program.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.