Read the full transcript here.

Excerpt:

Ali Ettefagh: Thank you for your participation. I think the main focus of the current rounds about Iranian nuclear operations must be framed within the legal structure of the NPT as this is a test of the value and effect of international treaties and whether treaties can be interpreted by political pressure. This can be a fundamental issue in world affairs and whether agreements can be bulldozed by unlearned opinions. In case of Iran, there has been specific pressure on Iran to prove a negative. That will be a very dangerous precedent.

_______________________

Lisbon, Portugal: Is there really anything the international community can do to make Iran give up its nuclear program short of war? Why bother with negotiations?

Ali Ettefagh: The issue under discussion is exactly why should Iran give up its civilian nuclear program to which it is entitled under NPT, especially Article 4 of it. In other words, Iran joined an international legal system to benefit from a system and a body of law to let it have civilian nuclear programs. The UN agency in charge of the Treaty, the IAEA in Vienna, is the body that must conduct and regulate the affairs of treaty members and it has made more than 2200 hours of inspections of Iranian facilities. No other country has been inspected in this manner. And the report is that Iran has complied with its treaty obligations.

You ask why bother with negotiations? I think this has to be put to the countries that pressure Iran. Iran is in full compliance with its treaty obligations. Should Iran be pressured to renounce its rights under the NPT? I say no, as tomorrow, other countries may be forced to do the same.

_______________________

New Hampshire: Hello Mr. Ettefagh and thank you for taking my question.

I remain perplexed at the situation regarding the development of nuclear technology in Iran. Why is it ok for Israel, Pakistan and India to possess nuclear weapons and not okay for other nations? I certainly can understand the impetus for wanting such technology as the US has launched wars on Iran's borders-- Iraq and Afghanistan. Israel's aggression to the Palestinians and the Lebanese is fully evident now.

As long as none of these nations are committed to doing away with their nuclear weapons or technology, I simply do not see the fairness of such a "policy". I, for one, would like to see a nuclear weapons free world, but I don't see that happening until all nations come together honestly and openly.

Ali Ettefagh: Thank you for your comments.

I am as much perplexed as you are about this massive hype and the double standards that are being applied. I am even more concerned why Iran is put in a position that it has to prove a negative: i.e. that it does not have nuclear weapons. It is absurd!

The Nuke 5 have a treaty obligation to stop proliferation of weapons-related equipment, alas non-members of the NPT (like India and Israel) have long accessed western equipment and systems for their weapons programs. I would also like to get rid of double standards.

_______________________

Oslo, Norway: I think that Iranian stubbornness on the matter of enrichment is much more a question of the national pride today. It's more about being a member of the atomic club and being respected as a modern society with access to technology rather than possessing the bomb. What are your ideas about that? At the same time, I have feeling that it can simply be a very well done cover-up number by the government to play the nationalist card. Lately I have seen a lot of national flag waving instead of the standard green flags and "Down with USA" banners. What do you think?

Ali Ettefagh: Thank you for your question. The issue of access to technology is a matter of pride for any nation. There is nothing wrong with any nation to seek a more modern life for its people. The issue is also a matter of principles within international legal system that we all respect: If a country like Iran is a member of NPT, and when Iran has complied with its treaty obligations, why should it be stopped from its treaty rights? The treaty is essentially a set of rules that govern nuclear technology and there are no bans for a country to obtain peaceful nuclear technology for, say, electricity. Moreover, Iran has vast uranium ore deposits and this natural resource, like oil and gas, could be commercialized for export to the rest of the world. Look at India, for example. It is a very promising market for future exports of uranium.

As for your suggestion of a "cover-up", the world is too small. The Iranian government is not a cheater and very intrusive inspections by the IAEA have concluded that there are no military programs in Iran.

Continue the discussion and pose further questions for Ali Ettefagh below.