Iran said on Tuesday that it expected talks with the watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to continue and it was optimistic that they would proceed in the right direction.

In the latest high-level talks between the IAEA and Iran, conducted in Tehran in January and February, Iranian officials stuck to a refusal to address intelligence reports about covert research relevant to developing nuclear weapons. Iran says its nuclear programme is for peaceful energy purposes only.

We expect the dialogue that has started will continue, Iran's Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi told reporters after giving a speech to the U.N.-sponsored Conference on Disarmament. There was some disagreement on drafting an initial framework that would set the ground for a new roadmap as how to proceed.

We are optimistic, he added, that upcoming meetings between the high delegation of the IAEA and the Iranian (side) will be proceeding hopefully in the right direction.

The IAEA said that, given Iran's unwillingness to tackle the allegations of research with military nuclear applications, no further talks were scheduled.

Salehi also accused the West of double standards for backing Iran's arch-enemy Israel, the only Middle East state outside the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and widely believed to be have the only nuclear arsenal in the region.

We have clearly stated time and time again there are two alternatives in dealing with the Iranian peaceful nuclear programme. One way is engagement, cooperation and interaction. The other is confrontation and conflict, Salehi said.

...Iran is confident of the peaceful nature of its programme and has always insisted on the first alternative. When it comes to our relevant rights and obligations, our consistent position is that Iran does not seek confrontation, nor does it want anything beyond its inalienable, legitimate rights.

Laura Kennedy, U.S. ambassador to the Conference on Disarmament, rejected Salehi's comments on Iran's commitment to nuclear disarmament, saying they stood in stark contrast to Iran's failure to comply with its international obligations regarding its nuclear programme.

Indeed, Iran has moved in the opposite direction by expanding its capacity to enrich uranium to nearly 20 percent and continues to move forward with proscribed enrichment and heavy-water related activities, all in violation of multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions, Kennedy told the talks.

Iran continues to deny the IAEA and broader international community the transparency and cooperation necessary to verify the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear programme.

Kennedy said that Iran's persistent stonewalling of the IAEA's investigation into possible military dimensions to its nuclear programme was very troubling.

She called on Iran to provide credible assurances of the exclusively peaceful nature of its nuclear activities.

Western diplomats briefed on the U.N. agency's latest talks in Tehran said the Iranian side had dismissed as baseless the inspectors mounting concerns about possible military aspects to the Islamic state's uranium enrichment programme.

The lack of progress in getting Tehran to start responding to the suspicions was a clear indication that it is not serious at all in entering any meaningful negotiation on the disputed programme, one Vienna-based envoy said.

Another Vienna-based official familiar with the issue said the IAEA team had asked for Iran's initial position on issues raised by the U.N. agency in a detailed November report that pointed to a possible covert nuclear weapons agenda in Iran.

There were sixty-five paragraphs in the IAEA's report and the Iranian side responded with sixty-five no's, the official said, making clear that Iran had rejected all information indicating illicit attempts to design a nuclear bomb.

In both meetings, the IAEA requested access to the Parchin military site mentioned in the agency's report, but the Iranian side did not agree to this, diplomats said.

They also said the team's Iranian interlocutors in the meetings did not appear to be the real decision-makers on the issue. It is like speaking to the middle man, one diplomat said.

(Reporting by Caroline Copley, Vincent Fribault and Stephanie Nebehay in Geneva and Fredrik Dahl in Vienna; Editing by Mark Heinrich)