Gregory Schulte: “The best assurance of security for Iran is for its leadership to abide by international commitments.”

Kayhan (London)
3rd August

Nazenin Ansari interviewed Gregory Schulte, the Permanent Representative of the United States to the United Nations Office in Vienna, the International Atomic Energy Agency on 3rd August.

Kayhan (London): The U.N. Security Council issued another ultimatum to Iran on Monday. It expressed its intention to adopt “appropriate measures” if Iran failed to comply by August 31 and suspend its enrichment programme. President Bush applauded the UNSCR, "It's a strong resolution.” What is the significance of this resolution?

Gregory Schulte: The UNSC previously issued a Presidential Statement but no Resolutions. Resolution 1696 is the first resolution adopted by the UN Security Council on Iran's nuclear program. This is, in itself, a significant step. It's a tough resolution that sends an unequivocal message: Iran must suspend activities of international concern, meet its obligations to cooperate with the International Atomic Energy Agency, and take advantage of the important offers made by Europe, the United States, Russia, and China. Let me be clear: Iran has the right to peaceful nuclear energy. This is recognized by the Resolution. But the world is concerned that Iran's activities are not all peaceful. After three years of intensive verification work, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) cannot certify the peaceful nature of Iran's program. The last two reports by the IAEA's Director General, Mohammed ElBaradei, document an almost complete lack of cooperation in resolving troubling questions about the program.

Kayhan (London): The Security Council resolution was originally intended to impose sanctions Aug. 31 if Iran refused to suspend uranium enrichment. In the end it only expressed its intention to adopt “appropriate measures” if Iran failed to comply by August 31.

Gregory Schulte: Our goal remains a diplomatic solution, as confirmed in the Resolution. This requires Iran's leaders to make a fundamental decision: Do they wish to continue confronting the world, or are they prepared to negotiate in good faith and take steps to build confidence? The package offered by the six Foreign Ministers from Europe, the United States, Russia and China remains on the table. It contains far-reaching proposals that would advance Iran's right to peaceful nuclear energy, including state-of-the-art nuclear power reactors, a nuclear cooperation agreement with the European Union, a joint venture for enrichment in Russia, and legally-binding assurances of nuclear fuel supply. Other proposals would benefit the Islamic Republic politically and economically, including in such areas as regional security, civil aviation, and telecommunications. The United States supports these proposals, and is ready to join the talks, but Iran must first meet the Security Council's requirements.

Kayhan (London): Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad rejected the resolution on Tuesday and other senior officials have dismissed it as “worthless”. The hardline Kayhan newspaper, whose editor is appointed by supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, said the UN order “does not carry the necessary weight… [and] the objective ... is to threaten Iran rather than take action.” In view of statements coming from Iran do you envisage an earlier meeting of the UN Security Council or will you stick to the August 31 deadline?

Gregory Schulte: The Security Council has set a deadline of August 31 and has requested a report by IAEA Director General ElBaradei by that date. The Security Council will be watching to see whether Iran's leaders abide by the mandatory requirements, including the suspension of all uranium enrichment-related activities at Natanz. These activities are being conducted at a facility previously hidden from the IAEA and the Iranian public. They have unexplained ties to Iran's military, its missile program, and an illicit trafficking network that provided nuclear weapons technology to countries like North Korea. Uranium enrichment is not necessary for a civil nuclear power program. Iran has only one power reactor under construction, and it will receive fuel from Russia. Indeed, Iran lacks sufficient natural uranium to be self-sufficient. Seventeen countries with civil nuclear power do not enrich, including technologically-advanced countries like Finland and Sweden. The activities at Natanz do not make sense -- except in the context of a military program.

Kayhan (London): How would you respond to those who say that by waiting and allowing the regime in Tehran to stall, the United States and the other UNSC members will be playing into Iran’s hands?

Gregory Schulte: The Security Council acted precisely because of concern that Iran's leaders were playing for time and failing to heed international concerns. The Resolution demonstrates the serious concern of countries across the world, including Russia and China. Here in Vienna at the IAEA, not only Russia and China, but countries like Japan, India, Egypt, and Brazil joined the United States and Europe in reporting Iran to the Security Council. By disregarding international concerns and international obligations, the leaders in Tehran are harming and isolating the people of Iran, who are already suffering from inflation, high unemployment, and lack of human rights. Iran is situated in a volatile region, but the pursuit of nuclear weapons will make it less secure not more. The pursuit of nuclear weapons won't give Iran prestige or influence, but leave it isolated, like North Korea, and risk sparking a regional nuclear arms race. The best assurance of security for Iran is for its leadership to abide by international commitments and to pursue a path of cooperation and negotiation rather than confrontation.

Kayhan (London): What is the next step? What kind of a resolution will you be working for?

Gregory Schulte: The next step depends upon Iran's leaders. They can still choose a path that brings economic benefit and long-term security to the Iranian people. If they fail to heed international concern, if they continue on the path of defiance, the Security Council made clear its intention to adopt appropriate measures under Chapter VII of the UN Charter.

Kayhan (London): To what extent do you think that the international community will remain resolute and steadfast in its position and are you optimistic about prospect of China and Russia agreeing to the adoption of sanctions?

Gregory Schulte: The international community has been remarkably united, as demonstrated by multiple IAEA resolutions and now by a mandatory resolution of the UN Security Council. This demonstrates a common concern about the nature of Iran's nuclear program and the intentions of its leadership. The leaders in Tehran claim the support of the Non-Aligned Movement, but of the sixteen NAM members on the IAEA Board, eight voted to report Iran to the Security Council. Only three -- Syria, Cuba, and Venezuela -- voted "no." Russia and China have been just as active as Europe and the United States in urging the leaders in Tehran to suspend activities of concern and to choose a course of negotiation rather than confrontation.

Kayhan (London): Ambassador Abdulaziz Al-Nasser of Qatar said his country voted "no" to 1696 because of the council's timing. "We do not agree with the resolution at a time when our region is in flames," he said. Speaking on the Iranian state television Ayatollah Khamenei stated that, “the incidents in Lebanon and Palestine have influenced our examination….Iran will stand with all oppressed peoples, particularly the Lebanese people and the Palestinian people…Muslims in the world must understand the only method to fight back the savage wolf of Zionism and Great Satan's aggression is resistance." In your opinion what is the extent of the link between the events in Lebanon and Iran’s nuclear program?

Gregory Schulte: If Iran's leaders thought that the violence sparked by Hezbollah would distract the world from Iran's nuclear program, they were wrong. The Security Council's action and unity make this clear. In fact, the Iranian leaders' support for Hezbollah, combined with their active opposition to Middle East peace, only increases world concerns about their pursuit of nuclear weapons. No one wants this dangerous regime to have access to the most dangerous of weapons. Their pursuit of nuclear weapons is a threat to the world and a threat to the region and will only leave the Islamic Republic further isolated politically and economically.

Kayhan (London): The United States has condemned the Iranian government’s severe repression of dissidents, and its continued crackdown on civil society and those fighting for personal freedom in Iran which resulted in the recent death of imprisoned Iranian student activist Akbar Mohammadi. The US has also called on the Iranian Government to respect the human rights of all Iranian citizens, including students, members of religious minorities, workers, and women, and to release those arrested and imprisoned as a consequence of defending universally accepted human rights and freedoms.

Gregory Schulte: Iran's leaders are good at extolling "nuclear rights." However they forget other, more basic rights, including free expression and human dignity. I've heard of a joke making the rounds in Tehran: "Iranians have the right to free expression -- once." President Bush would like a new relationship with the Islamic Republic and the people of Iran. But Iran's leaders must not only end their pursuit of nuclear weapon and support for terrorism. They must also address the human rights and democratic aspirations of the Iranian people.