The Latest from Iran (11 September): Prayers and PoliticsReceive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
The Washington Post carries an
interview with Iran's Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi, a top aide to President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, in which he talks about Iran's proposal on its nuclear programme to the "5+1" powers and challenges the understanding of the liberal democracy in the West.
Hashemi talked about a three-fold Iranian response to the west: economic cooperation, political engagement, and revision of international arrangements. The economic approach focuses on cooperation in the energy sector while the political engagement seeks the improvement of the situation in Afghanistan and cooperation to stop smuggling, narcotics, and terrorism. On uranium enrichment , Iran is proposing a systemic revision to eliminate all current nuclear weapons and to prevent the proliferation of these weapons.
The first response to this initiative came from Russia, where the Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Thursday that Iran's proposals contained something that powers "could work with".
Transcript:Q: What are the contents of the proposal given by Iran to the permanent members of the Security Council and Germany?
A: In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful, I thank you for this chance to speak. We are currently in the holy month of Ramadan and also commemorate the nights of Qadr.
One of the specialties of these nights for our nation is that they belong to the first imam, Ali. When his name is mentioned, the first thing that comes to mind is his commitment to justice. He has been quoted as saying that "if you offer me the whole world, but ask me to take a grain from the mouth of an ant with oppression, I will not accept."
A famous historian says about Imam Ali (peace be upon him): "He was killed while leading prayers, because of the greatness of his justice."
The Iranian nation follows such an imam. Not only Muslims, but all of humanity pride themselves that such a human existed. I say these things as a prologue to the answer to your question.
The package that the Islamic Republic of Iran has proposed, I will point out some of the generalities of the package.
This package speaks at least about three fields: one economic, one political and the third international issues.
In the economic subject, there are widespread opportunities for cooperation between the Islamic Republic of Iran and different countries, including European nations and the members of the 5-plus-1. Especially you know that Western nations are generally heavily affected by the international economic crisis, while the Islamic Republic has been affected much less. So much so that even according to international organizations and observers, the Iranian stock market is among the best in the world.
Q: Can you give me some more examples?
A: Especially in the field of energy, providing energy, there are many opportunities for cooperation. The other subject of the package is political cooperation.
It pays attention to peace, regional and international security, fighting narcotics smuggling, cooperation in fighting terrorism, in fighting organized crime. International cooperation can also be formed in this subject.
Q: What are the details of this subject of paying attention to peace and international security?
A: For instance, one of the crisis-ridden regions of the world is our neighbor Afghanistan. In spite of the increased presence of allied forces in that country, peace and security have not increased. At this point there are over 100,000 [foreign troops] in Afghanistan, while we see that the area of control of the central government has not increased. And the security of citizens is threatened even more. There have been demonstrations by people in Kabul and in other Afghan cities against the presence of foreign forces.
Apart from that, drug smuggling has strongly increased. Events inside Afghanistan have a wide range of regional and international effects. Some of the narcotics produced in Afghanistan are shipped to Europe, and Iran is paying a very high price in fighting smugglers. Apart from these, the infrastructure in that country has not been rebuilt or developed. Today a large number of Afghans are living unemployed and in poverty. This might be one of the main reasons behind the increased production of narcotics.
This is a subject that, with the participation of the legal Afghan government, can be focused on by everyone, and Iran can play its constructive role there. This can be a subject for discussions and cooperation.
We should all help the government of Afghanistan to be able to rule all over Afghanistan. We should all make sure that only useful and productive crops substitute for narcotics. We should all help to rebuild Afghanistan.
This is a good example on interaction, negotiations and speaking together, and all will benefit from it: the people, government and neighbors of Afghanistan, and also the region and the West.
This is just an example. There are many, many other examples where cooperation is possible.
Q: Is there any mention in the proposal of suspending uranium enrichment, a key demand in three rounds of United Nations sanctions?
A: The methods of preventing development of nuclear weapons and a widespread system for preventing the multiplying and the proliferation of nuclear weapons are a part of the package.
Since nuclear weapons are an international threat, with the cooperation of all countries we can design an international framework that, basically, prevents research, production, multiplying and keeping nuclear weapons and also moves toward destruction of present nuclear weapons.
Iran is ready in this path to offer any and every kind of cooperation and effort. No country must be exempt from this international framework against nuclear weapons.
Q: So you are confirming that Iran has no plans to give up uranium enrichment in the proposed package?
A: It's very obvious that all the nuclear activities of the Islamic Republic of Iran until now, and from now on, were within the framework of the laws of the Non-Proliferation Treaty, and agreements and contracts made with the International Atomic Energy Agency and their rules and conventions.
And it is also very obvious that legal and lawful activities are the right of every nation.
Q: So in the proposal you suggest this international framework against nuclear weapons in order to also remove doubts that Iran is making such weapons?
A: Since today the threat of nuclear weapons comes from countries that have them, and to be secure and safe from future activities of countries that in the future will join the nuclear club, this framework must be widely be implemented from now on.
Q: So that we don't have any misunderstandings about your words, this doesn't mean that you are planning to make a nuclear weapon, but an international system in which no one will be allowed to make nuclear weapons?
A: Iran not only does not want to make nuclear weapons, but is actually intensely against nuclear weapons. In all truth, Iran is trying to establish a new regime to prevent nuclear weapons worldwide, which are an international anxiety.
Q: "The U.S. representative in the International Atomic Energy Agency said on Wednesday that Iran has enough low-enriched material to make one nuclear bomb. What is your reaction?
A: These are not the words of the Americans. This is the Israelis speaking. It's better that the Americans give their own opinion.
Q: Iran has been saying that it is waiting for change from the U.S. What is your stance on the Obama administration?
A: For Iran, the paradoxical statements by American politicians have been strange. This shows that apparently there is no central decision-making unit in the American government. Of course, the Obama government is under intense pressure from the Zionist lobby [to pressure Iran], but ultimately the Obama administration has been elected by the American people, and everybody expects their decisions to be based upon the interest of the American people.
Until now we have only seen words from the American government, but there have been no actions taken. Iran sent a message of congratulations after Obama's election victory. Iran said that within the framework of justice and international respect we are ready to interact with America. We even gave practical proposals to the American government in the past.
Q: Like what?
A: For instance, just as a step we asked for direct flights between Tehran and New York, but the Americans gave no response. This would have been the smallest step. With such an atmosphere, how can we count on their claims that they are ready for negotiations or a rebuilding of relations with Iran?
One point that is very important for Iran is the interference of some elements of the American government in Iran's election and especially some of the American media, in directing and intensifying street unrest in Tehran. They had an important role.
Q: Who are you talking about? Hillary Clinton? U.S. media? Iran makes many of these claims.
A: Both of them. I think they know it very well. For example, one of them is VOA [Voice of America - Persian Service]. Both radio and TV.
With all of these ups and downs, still the road is not closed. Ultimately, if there are going to be interactions or relations, there should be really some practical, positive signs.
Q: Can you give me some practical signs that you would like to see from United States?
A: Maybe one of them could be apologizing for their interfering in Iran's election and other instances of meddling, which are not few.
Q: The supreme leader in his speech during the [Persian] new year holidays in Mashhad referred to a letter supposedly sent by Obama. Recently we have heard of a second letter sent by Mr. Obama. What was in this letter and why did he send the letter to the supreme leader and not to the president?"
A: I postpone the answer of this question to the future. Let's respond later.
Q: So the letters have been sent by Mr. Obama?
A: Well, I think I answered you.
Q: Yes, okay, but so you say that two letters have been sent?
A: American sources have said that they have sent those letters.
Q: And how about Iranian sources?
A: I told you, I will answer in the future.
Q: Okay, there has been talk of establishing a U.S. consulate or special interests section [in Tehran]? Do you see at this point in time any chance for the opening of such a special interests section?
A: This kind of request is not yet received.
Q: And if the request comes? How will Iran answer?
A: The president has said that if such a request comes, we will study it positively.
Q: Imagine that the U.S. sources are right about the letters. Why would Mr. Obama send the letters to the [supreme leader] and not to the president?"
A: The answer to this question depends on the last question. If they were right about the letters, you have ask this question of them.
Q: I did. They said they want to try approaching the supreme leader because they have a feeling that there is a difference between the government and the supreme leader in their points of view. They think it's better for them to approach him directly.
A: The response to such a question has been given previously by president and the supreme leader in their speeches. The policies of the Islamic Republic are homogenous. When policies are made and chosen, everybody follows them. So there is no difference in the policies of the supreme leader or those of the government.
Of course, the government is the executive power, and it's the government that carries out the policies. Mr. President [Ahmadinejad] is the head of Supreme National Security Council, in fact. The representatives of the supreme leader are also on that council. Therefore, the decisions made in that council are coordinated decisions which are carried out throughout the system and government. Such a difference is just the belief of some American officials.
Q: What if the Western countries turn down the package? What will be Iran's reaction?
A: If they decline the package, it means they don't agree with the development of economic, political and international relations and economic cooperation. That means that they still wish to continue their nuclear policies on building, multiplying and preparation of nuclear weapons and shy away from disarmament. Of course, I don't think this will happen because it's a great opportunity for them.
Q: Ahmadinejad has said that the Western nations are in a gradual downfall and that this is an exceptional chance for the Islamic revolution to present its own theory on how to run the world appropriately. Does this mean that we face a much more active Iranian foreign policy in the coming four years?
A: Yes, you do.
Q: Could you elaborate more on this in practice?
A: The actions today by the West are based on a certain specific philosophy and ideology, which is so-called liberal democracy. Both the internal and external signs of this Western liberal democracy show that it's approaching defeat and collapse.
The opportunity for Westerners to speak their views and to participate in determining their fate is very limited and weak. You see, for example, in the United States there are only two major parties that are active in politics. If somebody is not affiliated with either of these parties, he won't be able to reach high positions within the government, for example to become president.
Can you find a president of America who won the election without being dependent on one of these parties? The political parties take away the possibility of the presence of original forces in the nation. Power just changes hands between members of two parties.
And if this were the only thing, there would be less criticism.
But unfortunately there are organized groups and parties behind the scenes that force their views even on those two parties.
Not only in the United States; they are only one example. Unfortunately, an important part of politicians in Europe -- not all of them -- who are in parliament or parties, or have the media, are forced to act under the pressure of the Zionist lobby.
They don't have the necessary independence. We received this conception from political negotiations between Iran and many of these politicians. I, myself, have talked with some high-ranking European officials and authorities. When we speak to them about international events and we ask them to take a fair position, they say they are under pressure.
There are many examples. It shows what liberal democracy is today. It's not only in politics. It can be expanded to economics, the media and to international relations. But the present time is not sufficient for such talks now. I'm ready to open this completely for you.
I want to say in summary: justice as the basic principle, of keeping the dignity of human beings, is not paid attention to by those politicians. . . . The interests of special power groups have higher priority than this. [Examples are] what happened in Iraq, like American interference, harsh prisons in Iraq and the U.S.A., injuring and killing people in Iraq and not caring about civilian citizens in Afghanistan and Pakistan. So much so that even the NATO secretary general says that in order to make Afghanistan secure, civilians will be killed
In fact, they divide the world into two groups: first-degree and second-degree humans.
This shows liberal democracy is just a claim and has no essence.
But what we say must happen as a basic principle are a number of things. The first is justice as a general human requirement; it should be one of the first fundamentals of everything. Safeguarding human dignity is another. Kindness and love should be the basis of peace and security. Mutual respect is another principle which must be considered in international relations, in governance, in economic relations, in financial relations and other dimensions.
If you discuss the international economic crisis, a big part of this crisis is rooted in the injustices that exist in the world, which are because of the relations and structures that the great powers have forced onto the world. If these injustices did not exist, this event would not happen.
There are many things that should be changed: the structure of the U.N., structure of the U.N. [Security Council], the work procedure in [the Security Council] and the veto privilege for the permanent members.
All of these show that the present structure ruling the world belongs to 60 years ago and is the result of the Second World War, in which some were victorious and one group lost. At that point, they planned things in such a way so the whole world would always be controlled by themselves. I think the time has come to evaluate these relations and new relations to be created.
Q: What steps will Iran take in order to spread its world view? Will this be some kind of diplomatic offensive?
A: I think that if the present structure and relations are properly explained to the people, and if the media help to clarify the realities and truth for the people with respect to the general request for creating justice in the world and the activities of the political elite, we can reform the present situation.
The request is there; the circumstances are ready. The great powers have no replacement for their present unsuccessful rule. If they had, they would have solved the 60-year problem of Palestine. They would have solved the problems of Afghanistan. They would have solved the problems of regional wars and other international issues. But nothing has been solved in the world. People don't feel secure. They don't even implement international disarmament, while everybody knows that nuclear weapons are a general threat.
I remember a U.S. politician talked about a bomber plane carrying atomic weapons which flew from one airport to another. He said that if something had happened to that plane, a great tragedy would have been created for America.
Even though they know that production and storage of nuclear weapons [are dangerous], they still continue. This shows that they are too irresponsible to run the world. Naturally, everything needs to be changed.
Q: Do we see all of this reflected in the package?
A: Of course, what Iran proposes is based upon international interest, justice, cooperation and mutual respect: principles which are accepted worldwide. All wise and logical people accept this.
Q: So in the U.N., [Ahmadinejad] will announce this diplomatic offensive?
A: It has been like this until now.
Sunday, September 27, 2009 at 7:44 
Perhaps the least surprising dimension of the story of the second Iranian enrichment plant has been the speed and intensity of Israeli official reactions came flat out.
Enduring America, 17 September: "It’s a stunning if risky move. The Obama Administration is hoping to move the agenda away from specific cases such as Iran towards a wider framework encompassing all existing or aspiring nuclear powers. In the short term, that means dropping the deadline of either September or December for Tehran to give way on all demands regarding its nuclear programme." 
On Friday, members of the International Atomic Energy Agency voted 49-45, with 16 abstaining, for a resolution which "