The Iran Primer

 

MR. INDYK:  Mr. President, if we can shift to Iran.  In 1981, you were opposed to the use of preventive force against Iraq’s nuclear program.  And I wonder, when you look back on that, what were you thinking about that at the time?  What was your reason for opposition? 

 

PRESIDENT PERES:  Let’s not talk about Iran without patience, ability, strength, and cool, and say Iran, the Iranians are not our enemies.  In history, we have many very friendly relations, and now very dangerous.  So I’m asking ourself, why are we really against Iran?  Is it just because of nuclear bomb?  Not only.

 

What revolts the world against Iran is that in the 21^st century, the Iranian leaders, not the Iranian people, are the only one that wants to renew imperialism – we can’t accept it – in the name of religion.  From that, it started.  That’s the reason why many Arabs are against not Iran, but the Iranian hegemony.  The Iranians don’t say the hegemony should be Arabic, because they’re not Arabs.  So they want to say it Muslim, because they’re Muslims. 

 

And we see the way they want to construct an empire – by terror, by sending money, sending arms, hanging, bluffing.  We cannot support it.  The world cannot support it, whether you are a Russian – I am speaking in – with [Vladimir] Putin and [Dmitry] Medvedev to say we cannot support a nuclear Iran. Now, if Iran will win, the whole Middle East will become the victim.  Actually, the world economy will become the victim, because the way they rule is without any regard to anybody else.  And this is the first problem.  We cannot allow it to happen – all of us. 

 

The second thing is the ways they do.  It’s against a return to the Machiavellian formula that the goals justify the means.  So you can kill, you can lie, you can murder, you can collect arms.    My God, we are over it.  We cannot return to it.  It’s a human problem.  The globe is already so complicated.  It doesn’t govern without the government in economic terms.  And this is a terrible alternative.  And I’m afraid that some countries may take advantage if the Iranians will ruin the situation in Iraq, in Syria, in Lebanon, and they won’t stop.  They will go further, wherever there is a drop of oil, wherever there is a chance of gaining anything. 

 

We can’t agree with it.  And that is why the nuclear weapons became so dangerous, because they serve a purpose and nobody can guarantee that they will restrain.  And it’s governed by a single man who nominated himself as a deputy of Mohammed, my God.  And where such a complete holiness arrives, reason stops, prediction stops.

 

And it’s a situation that I am not aware of anybody that threatens Iran, that wants to oppress Iran or govern Iran or reduce Iran, nothing whatsoever.  Iran could have flourished without it.  They have oil.  They have a large country.  They have an old culture.  Who is against Iran?  We’re against a policy that endangers our age.  And unfortunately, they use the time – I can understand exactly the United States of America.  It can say well, the United States, why did you do this, why did you do that…but Iran cannot take away from United States one thing: the character of their history.  There is no trace of imperialism in American character. 

 

Yesterday, I’ve been at the headquarters of your army.  I told them you’re the only army that doesn’t fight to conquer or to occupy but fights for freedom and peace, not only for America, for the rest of the world.  Historically speaking, the Americans are fighting for values, no matter if you do this or you do that.  So you cannot be caring of the rest of the world and indifferent to Iran.  And the Iranians are speeding up.  They are taking the American process of democracy and making the wrong use of it. 

 

So I believe that President Obama represents the deepest assumptions and concepts of the American history.  It’s above politics.  It’s above everything else.  I think the reasons are profound and serious and urgent because they may reach a point of no return. Then it is too late.  So the President said rightly I want to try with nonmilitary means, which is typically American, rightly so.  But America understands if this will be the only option, the Iranians will laugh at them, say okay, the sanctions won’t act, and then she’ll be free.  Then they said – the Americans are saying there are other options on the table, please don’t forget it.  And we are aware of the time element as well. 

 

So this is the way really I look at it.  I don’t take it as a personal whim or as a personal ambition.  Clearly we are more sensitive than others because when nobody threatens Iran, Iran threatens us.  What did we do to them?  We are the only country which is being threatened to be destroyed by them.  But I don’t suggest that this is the only reason that makes us more sensitive.  But it doesn’t reduce the great and major danger that we are facing.

 

MR. INDYK:  Madam Secretary, maybe you can tell us how it’s going with the negotiations after an initial sense of optimism with the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] as well.  Both tracks, both the IAEA and the negotiations have taken place in Baghdad.  There’s a sense that not much progress is being made.  Is that an accurate perception?

 

SECRETARY CLINTON:  The point of the negotiations is to do exactly what Shimon said, which we have been consistent in pursuing since the beginning of the Obama Administration, to have a credible pressure track that united the entire world.  That was not the case when President Obama took office, and it now is.  It’s quite remarkable that not only the international community in general but the P-5+1 and, most particularly, China and Russia have remained as committed and forceful in the diplomatic negotiations with Iran over the nuclear program. 

 

There will be, as you know, meetings in Moscow starting next week, over the weekend.  And there is a unified position being presented by the P-5+1 that gives Iran, if it is interested in taking a diplomatic way out, a very clear path that would be verifiable and would be linked to action for action, which has been the approach that we’ve advocated and that has been agreed upon.

I can’t, sitting here today, tell you what the Iranians will or won’t do, but I am quite certain that they are under tremendous pressure from the Russians and the Chinese to come to Moscow prepared to respond.  Now, whether that response is adequate or not, we will have to judge.  They, for about the last 10 days, have been pushing to get a so-called experts meeting, pushing to try to even postpone Moscow in the absence of such meeting.  And there was not a single blink by any of the negotiators.  And then, as you saw in the news, there was a statement that yes, the Iranians would show up.  My counterpart from Russia, Sergey Lavrov, is either there or on his way there. 

 

And the Russians have made it very clear that they expect the Iranians to advance the discussion in Moscow, not to just come, listen, and leave.  We’ll know once it happens.  But I think that the unity and the resolve that has been shown thus far is of real significance, because clearly the threats that Shimon outlined are very real.  The continuing effort by the Iranians to extend their influence and to use terror as a tool to do so extends to our hemisphere and all the way to East Asia.  So the threat is real.  We’re dealing with a regime that has hegemonic ambitions.  Those who live in the near neighborhood are well aware of that, trying to manage it, and avoid the Iranians’ ability to score points and create more islands of influence is one of the great challenges that we are coping with.

 

But I just want to end with a story that I brought back from Georgia last week.  I was in Batumi, which my friend, Strobe Talbott knows well, which is being turned into a kind of mini Las Vegas on the Black Sea – lots of casinos, big hotels, all kinds of public art.  And I was talking to one of the municipal officials, and I said, “Well, what kind of tourist season are you expecting?”  He said, “We think we’re going to have a huge tourist influx.”  I said, “So who are most of your tourists?  Where do they come from?”  He said, “Well, we have a lot of Turks and we have a lot of Russians and we have a lot of Iranians and we have a lot of Israelis.”  I said, “Oh, how’s that all work?”  And he says, “Well, I’ll tell you,” he said, “if you go to the discos late at night, the two kinds of people that are left are the Iranians and the Israelis.” 

 

And shortly after hearing that story, I walked into a public building in Batumi, which is one of President Saakashvili’s very creative and impressive advancements, where truly it’s one-stop shopping.  You go into one public building; you can get a marriage license, a work license, a passport.  It’s quite remarkable.  So I was wandering around, being shown this modern technological wonder.  And I walked into the visa section, and these three men came running up to me and they said, “We love you, we love you.  We’re from Iran.”  And I said, “Oh well, we’re trying to get along with you.”  “Oh, we like you.  The people like you.”

 

Now, who knows?  But I think that – I think that the larger point in Shimon’s very eloquent and, as usual, compelling description is that there continues to be this disconnect between the people of Iran, which is a much more diverse society than most of us understand or know how to deal with, and this leadership, which is becoming more and more rigid, more of a military dictatorship, if you will.  And so there is a lot happening inside Iran, and keeping this pressure on, keeping the sanctions on, keeping the world united against this nuclear threat and what it represents to this regime, remains our highest priority.  So we’re pushing forward on it, and we’ll see what comes out of Moscow.