India voting against Iran in IAEA is not a strategic move,but a major difference…We wanted India to play its cards right’

We always consider India as our friend. When I was the secretary of the Supreme National Council of Iran,the first visit that I paid to another country was to India. Therefore,I can say that our relationship with India is very close and tight.

Youve had some meetings in Mumbai and Delhi. How good have they been and whats the mood that you picked up?

We had very good meetings both in Mumbai and in New Delhiboth with the business people and high-ranking officials of your country,like the Prime Minister,the President and your Foreign Minister. Overall,we had very good meetings.

Because India and Iran have a very nuanced relationship and a very practical one. Both countries give flexibility to each other.

Maybe it is better to say that Iran and India play a complementary role to each other. This goes back to the roots that bind the two countries together. It goes back (several) centuries. There were many Iranian scientists who came to India. I can say that for almost two centuries,Persian was the official court language (of India). You have some great people who are also considered great people for us too. Like Gandhi,like Jawaharlal Nehru. These are some great people. The people of Iran know about them. Their works are being studied even today in Iran. You have some Indian poets and they have actually written their poetry in Persian language and they are very famous in Iran too. So I can say that the people of the two countries are very close to each other. And when countries have very good people-to-people contacts,then it is very easy for them to have political cooperation.

And yet,we have some arguments also between us.

Thats natural. In todays world,there are always small arguments and differences. You see that even in a small family,members arguing with each other. We have to see whether they are tactical or strategic. But when it comes to the strategic level,we have no difference of opinion.

So when India votes in IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) against Iran,is that a tactical move or a strategic move?

It is not a strategic move,but its a major difference. I think close countries like us should pay more attention to each other. If we have strategic problems,then it is going to affect our relationship in a major way.

So you think that the act of voting against Iran does not affect the fundamental relationship or the quality of the fundamental relationship?

It might have had some effects,yes,but it has not been fundamental. You see that the relationship is going on.

Also because Iranians are consummate diplomats for 2,000 years.

Indians have been very good career diplomats for many years. Differences like this or arguments like this are not the ones that can separate the two nations from each other. Of course,the leaders of the two countries are wise enough. They are not going to make a big deal out of it.

Because that vote came when you were the chief negotiator.

I remember that. At that time,I was encouraging Iran to adopt a look-East policy. Because during the time of the Shah,Iran was looking at the West… Maybe India could have chosen other things. That voting was like a stroke.

…like a blow. So what did you tell your Indian friends then?

Nothing really. I said that you could have done a better job because you know us very well. We wanted India to play a more active role. You know we have the UK and France also involved in this matter. But India cannot be compared to them. It is a great country,a major economic power,it is close to us culturally. We wanted India to play its cards the right way.

You are very right when you say we have many other points of closenessculture,religion,spirituality. Because,we in India cannot forget and we will always be grateful that when we had Hindu-Muslim tension after the Babri Masjid incident,Mr Rafsanjani came to India and in a public speech at the Imambara in Lucknow,he said that Muslims in India should feel safe under the Indian system of secularism. And that had the effect of cooling down the anger in India. India will be eternally grateful for that.

This has always been the strategy of the Islamic Republic of Iranto foster unity among Muslims and we have always been pro-tranquillity and peace. We have always been against terrorist acts.

…or communal differences between different communities,in this case.

I believe that we have huge mutual interests in the region and we have to try to take advantage of them in peace and harmony. You know these extremist groups have been creating problems for everyone in the region. You know whats going on in Afghanistan,in Syria. We have always been against such moves.

In fact,that is what impressed people in India,that Iran was speaking in its own voice and not just reflecting at that point even the view of the OIC. Iran is always an original mind and an original power. It can look at things by itself like a big power.

This is the same role that we have played in other parts of the world. We believe this is our responsibility to do so. In Iraq,there were so many clashes and tensions after it was occupied. Iran had a spiritual presence there and tried to calm things down. In Afghanistan,we tried to prevent a civil war. That was the idea fostered by Imam Khomeini,the founder of the Islamic system in Iran. He said that Muslims should have convergence and unity. As far as I know,behind these extremist movements,we can find the intelligence services of certain countries.

Do you describe Israel as a Western country or as an Asian country or an Eastern country?

Israel is famous for such actions. They have assassinated five Iranian nuclear scientists in the past few years. This regime is founded on terrorist acts. But I think more important intelligence services are behind them. The more important point to know is that ethnic groups are followers of different faith and religions and have been living with each other for thousands of years. But these are new incidents. It means that they are not natural and there is an outside agent that is interfering. For example,in Iraq,they have Shias and Sunnis. They were marrying each other,having a peaceful co-existence for many years. Now,we see in recent years that there are tensions,there are conflicts.

In fact,I notice that your family had relocated to Iraq. You were born in Najaf.

Yes,I was born in Najaf. I know Iraq very well. There are many ethnic groups there,followers of different faiths. They have always had very good relations with each other. You had these things here too. Hindus,Muslims,people who were living peacefully.

And Shias and Sunnis live quite peacefully in India.

But sometimes there are some elements that provoke them. You know the British had this policy of divide and conquer. And there are always plots like this being hatched.

So how do you look at the targeting of Shias in Pakistan right now?

I think there are two reasons behind it. One,there is this extremist or radical thinking that is to blame. Unfortunately,this way of thinking has been there for many years. They think that we are the only ones who are Muslims,others are infidels. There is also something behind the scenes. Both of them are at play.

So what are you advising your Pakistani counterparts because the President of Pakistan is in Iran right now?

We have always had close relations with Pakistan as a neighbouring country. We have always wanted peace and tranquillity to prevail in both Pakistan and Afghanistan. And they always listen to us.

But are you now impatient or worried about these persistent attacks on Shias which are killing large number of people,not one or two people but hundreds of them?

In Iran,we also have Sunnis,other minorities. We have a lot of Zoroastrians and Christians.

Well,Sikhs have been there in Iran forever.

We have always had this strategy in Iran so that different ethnic groups and religions will have a peaceful co-existence.

So what are you telling the Pakistanis then? Are you advising them?

There is a point here. Maybe there are some groups in Pakistan and they are involved in some actions. But these actions,Im sure,arent approved by the government.

We are going back to Almaty now. Your current negotiator said that these talks have been like a turning point. Secretary Kerry (US Secretary of State John Kerry) has said that there might be hope or this is a new beginning. Do you see some hope in the current negotiations on the nuclear issue?

Ive been in India,so I dont know the details of the negotiations. Just like you,I have read my information from the media. I have to see details before I can pass judgments.

But are you optimistic about the negotiations?

I cant jump to any conclusions. But according to what I hear from the media,I have no reason to be pessimistic.

Supreme Leader (Ayatollah Ali Khameini) had said on the one hand that nobody can stop Iran from doing whatever it wants by way of enrichment,stockpiling of materials. At the same time,the official position is that Iran does not want nuclear weapons. So what does Iran want?

(Iran) wants to have access to nuclear knowledge,fuel for our power plants. You know that in the future,fuel is going to be a crucial matter. How many power plants do you have? More than 20. Dont you need fuel for them? This is something that has made all countries think. We are a member of the IAEA and according to the rules and regulations of the IAEA,member countries can have access to this knowledge and have peaceful programmes. Why is it that they say Iran should not have a peaceful programme? The IAEA is not doing a good job. It is ineffective. It is like thiscountries should either develop a bomb and have nothing to do with the IAEA,or they shouldnt have anything related to nuclear energy. This is a dangerous thing… Countries should have access to this technology but at the same time,they should have enough understanding not to develop a nuclear bomb. We have proven this. During the Iran-Iraq war,Saddam Hussein made use of chemical weapons against Iran. You know that chemical weapons are relatively easy to produce but we never retaliated.

Most of our plants are power plants,civilian plants are under IAEA safeguards. How come the IAEA has found problems with Irans programme? They keep raising questions; they keep questioning your compliance with NPT (Nuclear Proliferation Treaty) and with safeguards. Because the IAEA is a UN agency.

You can take an educated guess. They have other problems with us. Now they come up with excuses to put more pressure on us. And sometimes,theyve told me about this in our negotiations. In the media they say something different. They say we are worried about our nuclear programme but in negotiations they say different things. They say we are doing this to you because you are disturbing the balance of power in the region. This is not rational. We dont believe that if we have access to nuclear technology,we will be a powerful country.

You said somebody is concerned about Iran disturbing the balance of power in the region. Is it balance of power vis-à-vis Israel or vis-à-vis Saudi Arabia or both?

I think they are classifying countries of the region because they want to dominate the energy resources. They want to have a monopoly,dominate energy sources of the world. Maybe one of their plots in the future will be to prevent the major powers in the east by controlling their energy sources.

So where do you put the two countries in this equationSaudi Arabia and Israel? Saudi Arabia is an Islamic country.

I think they are very different from each other. We dont put Saudi Arabia in this equation. We have always been pro-unity so that there could be peace in the region. Israel is like a pest. It creates problems for the whole region.

Pest is a strong word. I think it is stronger than what your President has used for Israel.

Maybe I made a mistake. Israel is like a disturbance.

A nuisance?

Yes.

Do you agree with your Presidents description of Israel?

There is no doubt that the Zionist regime in the region makes trouble.

How do you respond to your Presidents questioning of the Holocaust,for example,which got many people in the world very disturbed? Did you share that view?

There are different views about the Holocaust. That is a historical incident. I think the more important thing is that we see in what ways they are taking advantage of it. I am not a historian to discuss it. Suppose Hitler did this,he made a big mistake. But why should the Palestinians pay the price for it? They want to magnify the Holocaust on one hand and then diminish the occupation of Palestine.

Let us come back to India. Many in India,including the security agencies,feel that there was Iranian involvement in the attack on the Israeli woman diplomat in Delhi. Is Iran helping India? What is the status of our talks on that?

Of course,we have been cooperating with India. We have no problems with that. These are actually fairytales. We have no reason to be involved in such things. I told you about Irans strategy. This suits the Israelis themselves because they are used to doing things like this. Maybe they do it themselves so that they can pit friendly countries like us against each other. They have done mischievous things like this in the past.

So you have no evidence of any Iranian involvement?

We have not been told about the existence of any evidence.

But are your agencies helping Indian agencies?

Yes. Any intelligence information that our Indian friends want we will put it at their service. But there is no information to give. I told you,in principle,we have always been against such action.

To that extent,you condemn an attack on any diplomat?

Yes,definitely. We do believe in the orders and norms,well-established ones. These are disorders…

Because you have so much on your CV already,in my introduction,I forgot one key factor,which is,that you are also an elected member of Parliament from the holy city of Qom. You are married into an Ayatollahs family,you are an Ayatollahs son-in-law. Explain to us Indians a little bit on how this balance of power works within Iranthe clergy and the Supreme Leader on one hand and elected leadership on the other and many in the Opposition. You have many arguments with your President. Many people in the world dont realise that under the supreme leadership in Iran,there is a robust,argumentative democracy.

You know arguments and differences of opinions are natural in all countries that have democracy. You have to know that the system of the Islamic Republic of Iran is democratic. If any person is related to an Ayatollah,it doesnt mean he is going to be in a position. The important thing is whether people elect them or not.

That is why I said you are an MP from Qom.

Even the Supreme leader is elected by the people. All people in all the positions are electedPresident,Supreme Leader,Member of Parliament.

Before I let you go,tell me,if you were to advise (Syrian President Bashar) Assad,what would you tell him today?

I would have two pieces of advice. My first piece of advice would be to countries who are sending arms to Syria.

To stop doing it and let there be elections?

Yes.

And second advice?

Let there be elections in Syriafree elections.

And if Assad loses,let him go out.

Yes,of course. Maybe people will vote for him,maybe they wont.

Last question. Will you be contesting the elections this June?

I still have time to announce this.

Thank you very much.

Transcribed by Chaitanya Gudipaty