September 25, 2007
New Speech at UN General Assembly
Mr. Chairman, Honorable Delegates,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am pleased and grateful to the Almighty to have the opportunity once again to attend this important universal forum.
In the present tumultuous world and predominance of loud outcries, threats and tensions, and in a time when the big powers are unable to solve the present problems, when mistrust in regional and international arenas is on the rise, when psychological security of societies is being targeted by an onslaught of political and propaganda designs, and disappointment prevails over efficacy of policies and actions of the international organizations in establishing durable peace and security, and the protection of human rights is being weakened, I plan to touch upon and explain the roots and ways out of these predicaments and some of the principal challenges facing our world. I will also speak to you about the need for amending the present situation, the prospects for a brighter and more hopeful future, and about the reappearance of the sublime and beauty, kindness and dignity, justice and blossoming of all divine human talents and dominance of love of God and realization of the promise of God as stated by all divine prophets and righteous men. I will then put to your judgment the nuclear issue of Iran as a reality and testing ground for measurement of honesty, efficacy, steadfastness and victories. In the closing part of my address, I will offer my proposals.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
As you are all aware we are presently facing important, numerous and diverse challenges; I will refer to some of them.
1- Organized attempts to tear down the institution of family and to reduce the status of women
The family is the most sacred and valuable human institution that serves as the center of the purest mutual love and affection of mothers, fathers and children, and a safe environment for the upbringing and cultivating human generations, and a fertile ground for blossoming of sentiments and emotions. This institution has always been respected by all nationalities, religions and cultures.
Today we are witnessing an organized invasion by the enemies of humanity and plunderers to tear down this genuine institution. They target this noble institution by promoting lewdness, violence and breaking the boundaries of chastity and decency.
The precious status of women as the expression of divine beauty and peak of kindness, affection and purity has been the target of heavy exploitation over the recent decades by the holders of power and owners of media and wealth. In some societies, this beloved creature has been reduced to mere instruments of publicity and all boundaries and protective shields of chastity, purity and beauty have been trampled. This is a colossal betrayal of human society, of succeeding generations, and an irreparable blow to social coherence.
2. Widespread Violations of Human Rights, Terrorism and Occupation
Unfortunately human rights are being extensively violated by certain powers, especially by those who pretend to be their exclusive advocates. Setting up clandestine prisons, abductions, trials and secret punishments without any regard to due process, listening on telephone conversations, opening private letters and frequent summons to police and security centers have become commonplace and prevalent. They prosecute scientists and historians for stating their opinions on important global issues. They are using different alibis to occupy sovereign nations and cause chaos and divisions, and then use the prevailing situation as an excuse to continue their occupation. For more than sixty years, Palestine, as compensation of the loss they incurred in the war in Europe, has been under occupation of the illegal Zionist regime. Their people have been displaced or are under heavy military pressure, economic siege or are incarcerated under abhorrent conditions. The occupiers are protected and praised, while innocent people of Palestine are subjected to political, military and propaganda onslaughts. The people of Palestine are deprived of water, electricity and medicine for the sin of asking for freedom, and their government that has come from the votes of the people is targeted. Terrorists are being organized to attack the lives and property of people, under auspices of politicians and military officials of the big powers.
The brutal Zionists carry out targeted assassinations of Palestinians in their homes and cities, and terrorists receive medals of peace and support from the big powers. On the other hand they gather a number of deprived Jewish people with false propaganda under the pretext of providing them with welfare, job and food from different parts of the world and settle them in the occupied territories and expose them to harshest restrictions, psychological pressures and constant threat. They prevent these deprived people to return to their homelands, and by use of force and false propaganda make them show hatred towards indigenous Palestinian people.
Iraq was occupied under the pretext of overthrow of a dictator and existence of weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi dictator who had been supported by the same occupiers was disposed of, and no weapons were discovered, but the occupation continues under different excuses. No day passes without people being killed, wounded or displaced, and the occupiers not only refuse to be accountable and ashamed, but speak in a report of a new market for their armaments as the result of their military venture. They even oppose the constitution, national assembly and the government arising from the votes of the people, while they do not even have the courage to declare their defeat and exit Iraq.
Unfortunately we are witnessing this bitter truth that some powers do not put value on any nation or human beings, and the only things that matters to them are themselves, their parties and groups.
In their view, human rights are tantamount to profits for their companies and friends. The rights and the good name of the American people are also being sacrificed for the selfish desires of those holding power.
3. Aggressions against Indigenous Cultures and National Values
Culture is the expression of identity and the key to survival of nations and the foundation for their interaction with others. In an organized movement, indigenous cultures that are messengers of monotheism, love and fraternity are being subjected to broad and destructive aggressions. National customs and values are humiliated and self-esteem and character of nations are ridiculed and defamed. The purpose is to promote blind emulations, consumerism, skeptics toward God and human values, and plundering of their wealth by big powers.
4. Poverty, illiteracy, Health Deprivation and Gap between the Poor and the Rich
While a major part of the natural environment in Asia, Africa and Latin America is being plundered by political and economic domination by certain powers. The situation of poverty and deprivation is very alarming. These are some numbers by the United Nations:
Every day close to 800 million people go to bed hungry and about 980 million suffer from absolute poverty, with less than one dollar a day in purchasing power.
People of 31 countries, equivalent to 9 percent of the world's population, have an average life expectancy equaling to 46 years, which is 32 years less than the average of some countries.
The ratio between the rich and the poor in some parts of the world is 40 times. In some countries, the majority of people are deprived of access to education and schooling. In many developing countries, the maternal mortality rate during pregnancy is 450 per 100,000. This ratio is 7 in the richer nations and the ratio of mortality of new births is 59 for developing countries and 6 for the richer nations. One-third of mortality in the world, or 50,000 daily, results from poverty. I believe these numbers clearly demonstrate the tragic situation prevailing over the global economy.
5. Ignoring Noble Values and Promotion of Deception and Lies
Some powers sacrifice all human values, including honesty, purity and trust for the advancement of their goals. They propagate skepticism and deception in relations between states and peoples. They lie openly, level baseless charges against others, act contrary to legal norms and damage the climate of trust and friendship. They openly abandon morality and noble values in their relations with others, and substitute selfishness, supremacy, enmity and imposition for justice, respect, love, affection and honesty.
They sacrifice all the good things of life and the sublime to their own greed.
6. Violations of Rules of International Law and Disrespect of Commitments
Some who were themselves the drafters of international law openly and easily violate them and apply discriminatory policies and double standards. They drafted disarmament regulations, but every day test and stockpile new generations of lethal weapons. They framed the Charter of the United Nations, but show disrespect to the right of self-determination and independence of sovereign nations. They conveniently abrogate their formal treaties, and do not yield to laws concerning protection of the environment. Most of the violations of international obligations are done by a few global powers.
7. Escalation of Threats and Arms Race
Some powers, whenever their logic fails, simply use the language of threats. The heavy arms race cast the shadow of threats over the globe. The nations of Europe were the victims of two world wars and a number of other devastating conflicts and were subjected to the consequences of the Cold War for many decades. Today Europeans are living under the shadow of threats, and their interests, security and lands are endangered under the shadow of the arms race imposed by certain big powers.
A bullying power allows itself the right to set up a missile system, makes the life of the peoples of a continent bitter and lays the ground for an arms race. Some rulers who superficially appear to be powerful act as a child that has acquired a plastic water gun and feels powerful and starts shooting impatiently at all things and at all times, threaten others and cast the shadow of insecurity over nations and regions.
8. Inefficacy of International Mechanisms to prevail over these challenges and to bring durable peace and security
International organizations and mechanisms clearly lack the capacity to overcome problems and challenges, to put in place fair and just relations and peace, fraternity and security. There is hardly any government or nation that places much hope in these mechanisms to secure its rights or defend its independence, territorial integrity and national interests.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
The challenges are a lot more than the ones I enumerated and I know that you would have presented many more if you wanted to dwell on them, but I chose to confine myself to the ones I stated.
Now, the important and decisive question concerns the roots and causes of these challenges. A scientific and careful analysis shows that the root of the present situation lies in two fundamental factors. Without doubt, the first factor lies in the relations arising from the consequences of the Second World War.
The victors of the war drew the roadmap for global domination and formulated their policies not on the basis of justice but for ensuring the interests of victors over the vanquished nations. Therefore, mechanisms arising from this approach and the related policies have not been capable of finding just solutions for global problems for 60 years. Some big powers still carry the conduct of the victors of a world war and regard other states and nations, even those that had nothing to do with the war, as the vanquished, and humiliate other nations and demand extortion from the condescending position similar to feudals and peasants of the medieval age. They regard themselves superior to others and are not accountable to any government or international body.
Colleagues, Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Among all the ineffective organizations, unfortunately, the UN Security Council ranks first. They have created circumstances in which some powers with exclusive and special right to veto in the Security Council act as prosecutor, Judge and executioner, regardless of being a defendant or respondent. It is natural that countries that have been subjected to their infringements have no hope to get what they deserve from the Council.
Unfortunately, humanity has witnessed that in all long wars, like the Korean and Vietnam wars, the war of the Zionists against Palestinians and Lebanon, the war of Saddam against the people of Iran and ethnic wars of Europe and Africa, one of the members of the Security Council was one of the belligerents or supported one party against the other, usually the aggressor, or the conflict itself.
Look at Iraq, they first occupied the country and then received authorization from the Security Council, the same Council in which the same occupiers have the right of veto. Who should the people of Iraq complain about and to where should they take their complaints with hopes of securing their rights? We saw in Lebanon that some powers delayed the decisions of the Security Council hoping for the victory of the Zionist regime. However, when they became disappointed in that usurper regime's victory, they approved of a ceasefire to take effect. But the duty of the Security Council is to prevent the expansion of conflicts, to put in place the ceasefire and promote peace and safety. Who should the people of Lebanon complain about and where should they take their complaints to?
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The presence of some monopolist powers has prevented the Security Council from doing its main duties which are safeguarding peace and security based on justice. The credibility of the council has been tarnished and its efficacy in defending the rights of its members has been destroyed. Many nations have lost their confidence in the Council. Some other mechanisms like the monetary and banking mechanisms are in the same undesirable situation and have been turned into tools for the imposition of the wishes of some powers on other nations. It is evident that these mechanisms are not capable of responding to the current needs and solving the challenges and establishing fair and sustainable relations.
Dear Colleagues,
Again, there is no doubt that the second and more important factor is some big powers' disregard of morals, divine values, the teachings of prophets and directions specified by the all knowing God, as well as the rule of the sinful. How can the sinful that cannot even manage and control themselves, rule humanity and arrange its affairs? Unfortunately, they have put themselves in the position of God! They are in servitude to their own whims and desire to have everything for themselves. For them, human dignity and the lives, properties, and lands of others are no longer important. Humanity has had the deep wound caused by impious powers on its battered body. Today, the problems that people around the world face are mainly rooted in the disregard of human values and morals and also in the management by the impious.
Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The only sustainable way to the betterment of mankind, is the return to the teachings of divine prophets, monotheism, respect for the dignity of humans and the flow of love and affections in all relationships, ties and regulations. Then the structures should be reformed based on these. To fulfill this objective, I invite everybody to line up a front of fraternity, amity and sustainable peace based on monotheism and justice under the name of "Coalition for Peace" to prevent incursions and arrogance and propagate the culture of affection and justice. I hereby announce that with the help of all independent, justice-seeking and peace-loving nations, the Islamic Eepublic of Iran will be treading on this path. Monotheism, Justice and love for humans should dominate all the pillars of the UN and this organization has to be a reference for justice and every member of it has to enjoy equal spiritual and legal support.
The General Assembly as the representative of the international community shall be considered as the most important pillar of the UN in order, free from any pressure and threats of big powers, to take the required measures for reforming the UN structures and especially change the present status of the Security Council, and define new structures based on justice and democracy with the purpose to become responsive to the present requirements and be able to settle the existing challenges leading to the establishment of sustainable stability and security.
Excellencies,
The nuclear issue of Iran is a clear example of the performance of such mechanisms and their prevailing concepts. As you all know, Iran is an official member of the International Atomic Energy Agency and has always observed its rules and regulations and has had the most extensive cooperation with this Agency in all aspects. All our nuclear work has been completely peaceful and transparent. According to the statute of the IAEA, any member has a number of rights and commitments. Actually, any member has to move on the peaceful path and, under the supervision of the Agency, assist other members and is entitled to be supported by the Agency and have access to the fuel cycle with the help the Agency and its members. So far, Iran has fulfilled all its obligations but has been deprived of other members' technical assistance and, even during some periods of time, of the Agency's support. For about 5 years, some of the aforementioned powers tried to deny the Iranian nation its rights by exerting pressure on IAEA.
They derailed Iran's nuclear issue of its legal path and politicized the atmosphere to impose their wishes, taking advantage of all their potentials. Iran spared no effort to build confidence. However, nothing satisfied them except the complete halt of all nuclear activities, even those related to research and university fields. They were only after depriving Iran of all its inalienable rights. Therefore, even those centers not involved in the fuel cycle or not in need of the supervision of the Agency were closed. After three years of negotiation and trying to build confidence, the Iranian nation came to the resolute conviction that the main concern of these powers is not the possible deviation of Iran from the rules and regulations of the Agency, but its scientific progress. If this trend continues, there will be no chance for Iran to enjoy its rights, not even in the next 20 years. Therefore, it has to be decided to follow up the issue on its right legal path that goes through the Agency away from illegitimate and political impositions by the arrogant powers. Of course, the Iranian nation has always been ready and now is prepared for constructive talks.
By abusing the Security Council, the arrogant powers have repeatedly accused Iran and even made military threats against it over the last two years. However, thanks to the faith in God and national unity, Iran has moved forward step by step and now our country is recognized as a country with the capacity for industrial scale fuel cycle production for peaceful uses.
Fortunately, the Agency has recently tried to regain its legal role as supporter of the rights of its members and supervisor of nuclear activities. We see this as a right approach adopted by the Agency. Previously, they illegally wished to politicize the Iranian nation's nuclear case, but today, thanks to the resistance of the Iranian nation, the issue is back at the Agency and I officially announce that in our opinion the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed and has turned into an ordinary matter. Today many questions have been raised on Iranian nuclear activities within IAEA by certain powers which shall be examined properly. Of course Iran has always been prepared to have constructive talks with all parties.
I would like to thank all the nations and countries that, during this hard juncture, defended the legal rights of my nation and motherland and also appreciate the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, our other friends in the Security Council, IAEA's Board of Governors, the committed and law-abiding experts of the Agency and its Director General for their insistence on the law. I would also like to announce that, unlike the monopolist powers, the Iranian nation is ready to offer to other members its experiences in the form of educational programs and based on the obligations of the Agency's statute and under its supervision.
Now I would like to address those who beleaguered the Iranian nation for about five years, offended and accused my people who have contributed to the history and civilization of the world, and to advise them to learn from their recent actions. They mistreated the Iranian nation but they have to be careful not to do the same with other nations and not to sacrifice the integrity of international organizations for the sake of their unlawful wishes. Today the nations of the world are wide awake, vigilant, and resistant. If you reform yourselves, the whole world will be reformed. Nations are inherently good and can coexist peacefully. They'd better try to serve their own people, and be sure that others do not need them. Is it not high time for these powers to return from the path of arrogance and obedience of Satan to the path of Godliness? Do they not like to be cleansed of their impurities, submit to the will of God and believe in him? Faith in God means believing in honesty, purity, justice and loving others!
They can be sure that they will benefit from purity, honesty, justice, loving and respecting human dignity. They can be sure that such attributes are considered to be more appropriate, valuable and beautiful by the nations of the world. This is the invitation of all divine prophets from Adam to Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and Mohammed. If they answer the invitation, they will be saved and if they don't, the same thing that befell the people of the past will befall them.
According to holy Koran:
"One who does not answer the divine call should not think that he has weakened God on earth; he has no companion but God and he is clearly engulfed by darkness".
They have nothing of their own and cannot escape from the dominion of the rule of God and his will.
In this important gathering, I have to remind them of the following words of the Almighty in the Holy Quran:
"Do they not look at the powers and governments which came before them? If the people of the past had actually possessed something, they would have kept it and would not have let you to posses it now. God destroyed them because of their sins and nobody could protect them against the will of God".
They have to know that the ways and traditions based on oppression and injustice will be destroyed. Do they not see the signs of vigilance and resistance based on monotheism, philanthropy and the justice-seeking spirit of the nations of the world? Do they not notice the imminent fall of empires?
I hope that this invitation will have a practical answer.
Excellencies,
Nations and countries don't have to obey the injustice of certain powers. These powers, because of the reasons already mentioned, have lost the competence to lead the world because of their hideous acts. I officially declare that the age of relations arising from the Second World War as well as materialistic thoughts based on arrogance and domination is well over now. Humanity has passed a perilous precipice and the age of monotheism, purity, affinity, respecting others, justice and true peace loving has commenced. It is the divine promise that the truth will be victorious and the earth will be inherited by the righteous. You, who are free, believers and the people of the world, put your trust in God. You, who crave for high values, wherever you are, try to prepare the grounds for the fulfillment of this great divine promise by serving the people and seeking justice.
The age of darkness will end, the prisoners will come back home, the occupied lands will be freed, Palestine and Iraq will be liberated from the domination of the occupiers and the people of Europe will be free of the pressures exerted by the Zionists. The tenderhearted and humanity loving governments will replace the aggressive and domineering ones. Human dignity will be regained. The pleasing aroma of justice will permeate the world and people will live together in a brotherly and affectionate manner. Striving in this way to give the rule to the righteous and the Promised One is actually the final cure for the wounds of humanity, the solution of all problems, and the establishment of love, beauty, justice and happiness all over the world. This belief and endeavor is the key to unity and constructive interactions among nations, countries, the people of the world and all true justice seekers.
Without any doubt, the Promised One who is the final Savior and the last heavenly message will come. In the company of all believers, justice-seekers and benefactors, he will establish the bright future and fill the world with justice and beauty. This is the promise of God, therefore it will be fulfilled. Let us have a role in the fulfillment of all this glory and beauty.
I wish for the bright future for all human beings and the dawn of liberation and freedom for all humans and the rule of love and affections all around the world as well as the elimination of oppression, hatred and violence. A wish which I think will be realized in the near future.
Source
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I am pleased and grateful to the Almighty to have the opportunity once again to attend this important universal forum.
In the present tumultuous world and predominance of loud outcries, threats and tensions, and in a time when the big powers are unable to solve the present problems, when mistrust in regional and international arenas is on the rise, when psychological security of societies is being targeted by an onslaught of political and propaganda designs, and disappointment prevails over efficacy of policies and actions of the international organizations in establishing durable peace and security, and the protection of human rights is being weakened, I plan to touch upon and explain the roots and ways out of these predicaments and some of the principal challenges facing our world. I will also speak to you about the need for amending the present situation, the prospects for a brighter and more hopeful future, and about the reappearance of the sublime and beauty, kindness and dignity, justice and blossoming of all divine human talents and dominance of love of God and realization of the promise of God as stated by all divine prophets and righteous men. I will then put to your judgment the nuclear issue of Iran as a reality and testing ground for measurement of honesty, efficacy, steadfastness and victories. In the closing part of my address, I will offer my proposals.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
As you are all aware we are presently facing important, numerous and diverse challenges; I will refer to some of them.
1- Organized attempts to tear down the institution of family and to reduce the status of women
The family is the most sacred and valuable human institution that serves as the center of the purest mutual love and affection of mothers, fathers and children, and a safe environment for the upbringing and cultivating human generations, and a fertile ground for blossoming of sentiments and emotions. This institution has always been respected by all nationalities, religions and cultures.
Today we are witnessing an organized invasion by the enemies of humanity and plunderers to tear down this genuine institution. They target this noble institution by promoting lewdness, violence and breaking the boundaries of chastity and decency.
The precious status of women as the expression of divine beauty and peak of kindness, affection and purity has been the target of heavy exploitation over the recent decades by the holders of power and owners of media and wealth. In some societies, this beloved creature has been reduced to mere instruments of publicity and all boundaries and protective shields of chastity, purity and beauty have been trampled. This is a colossal betrayal of human society, of succeeding generations, and an irreparable blow to social coherence.
2. Widespread Violations of Human Rights, Terrorism and Occupation
Unfortunately human rights are being extensively violated by certain powers, especially by those who pretend to be their exclusive advocates. Setting up clandestine prisons, abductions, trials and secret punishments without any regard to due process, listening on telephone conversations, opening private letters and frequent summons to police and security centers have become commonplace and prevalent. They prosecute scientists and historians for stating their opinions on important global issues. They are using different alibis to occupy sovereign nations and cause chaos and divisions, and then use the prevailing situation as an excuse to continue their occupation. For more than sixty years, Palestine, as compensation of the loss they incurred in the war in Europe, has been under occupation of the illegal Zionist regime. Their people have been displaced or are under heavy military pressure, economic siege or are incarcerated under abhorrent conditions. The occupiers are protected and praised, while innocent people of Palestine are subjected to political, military and propaganda onslaughts. The people of Palestine are deprived of water, electricity and medicine for the sin of asking for freedom, and their government that has come from the votes of the people is targeted. Terrorists are being organized to attack the lives and property of people, under auspices of politicians and military officials of the big powers.
The brutal Zionists carry out targeted assassinations of Palestinians in their homes and cities, and terrorists receive medals of peace and support from the big powers. On the other hand they gather a number of deprived Jewish people with false propaganda under the pretext of providing them with welfare, job and food from different parts of the world and settle them in the occupied territories and expose them to harshest restrictions, psychological pressures and constant threat. They prevent these deprived people to return to their homelands, and by use of force and false propaganda make them show hatred towards indigenous Palestinian people.
Iraq was occupied under the pretext of overthrow of a dictator and existence of weapons of mass destruction. The Iraqi dictator who had been supported by the same occupiers was disposed of, and no weapons were discovered, but the occupation continues under different excuses. No day passes without people being killed, wounded or displaced, and the occupiers not only refuse to be accountable and ashamed, but speak in a report of a new market for their armaments as the result of their military venture. They even oppose the constitution, national assembly and the government arising from the votes of the people, while they do not even have the courage to declare their defeat and exit Iraq.
Unfortunately we are witnessing this bitter truth that some powers do not put value on any nation or human beings, and the only things that matters to them are themselves, their parties and groups.
In their view, human rights are tantamount to profits for their companies and friends. The rights and the good name of the American people are also being sacrificed for the selfish desires of those holding power.
3. Aggressions against Indigenous Cultures and National Values
Culture is the expression of identity and the key to survival of nations and the foundation for their interaction with others. In an organized movement, indigenous cultures that are messengers of monotheism, love and fraternity are being subjected to broad and destructive aggressions. National customs and values are humiliated and self-esteem and character of nations are ridiculed and defamed. The purpose is to promote blind emulations, consumerism, skeptics toward God and human values, and plundering of their wealth by big powers.
4. Poverty, illiteracy, Health Deprivation and Gap between the Poor and the Rich
While a major part of the natural environment in Asia, Africa and Latin America is being plundered by political and economic domination by certain powers. The situation of poverty and deprivation is very alarming. These are some numbers by the United Nations:
Every day close to 800 million people go to bed hungry and about 980 million suffer from absolute poverty, with less than one dollar a day in purchasing power.
People of 31 countries, equivalent to 9 percent of the world's population, have an average life expectancy equaling to 46 years, which is 32 years less than the average of some countries.
The ratio between the rich and the poor in some parts of the world is 40 times. In some countries, the majority of people are deprived of access to education and schooling. In many developing countries, the maternal mortality rate during pregnancy is 450 per 100,000. This ratio is 7 in the richer nations and the ratio of mortality of new births is 59 for developing countries and 6 for the richer nations. One-third of mortality in the world, or 50,000 daily, results from poverty. I believe these numbers clearly demonstrate the tragic situation prevailing over the global economy.
5. Ignoring Noble Values and Promotion of Deception and Lies
Some powers sacrifice all human values, including honesty, purity and trust for the advancement of their goals. They propagate skepticism and deception in relations between states and peoples. They lie openly, level baseless charges against others, act contrary to legal norms and damage the climate of trust and friendship. They openly abandon morality and noble values in their relations with others, and substitute selfishness, supremacy, enmity and imposition for justice, respect, love, affection and honesty.
They sacrifice all the good things of life and the sublime to their own greed.
6. Violations of Rules of International Law and Disrespect of Commitments
Some who were themselves the drafters of international law openly and easily violate them and apply discriminatory policies and double standards. They drafted disarmament regulations, but every day test and stockpile new generations of lethal weapons. They framed the Charter of the United Nations, but show disrespect to the right of self-determination and independence of sovereign nations. They conveniently abrogate their formal treaties, and do not yield to laws concerning protection of the environment. Most of the violations of international obligations are done by a few global powers.
7. Escalation of Threats and Arms Race
Some powers, whenever their logic fails, simply use the language of threats. The heavy arms race cast the shadow of threats over the globe. The nations of Europe were the victims of two world wars and a number of other devastating conflicts and were subjected to the consequences of the Cold War for many decades. Today Europeans are living under the shadow of threats, and their interests, security and lands are endangered under the shadow of the arms race imposed by certain big powers.
A bullying power allows itself the right to set up a missile system, makes the life of the peoples of a continent bitter and lays the ground for an arms race. Some rulers who superficially appear to be powerful act as a child that has acquired a plastic water gun and feels powerful and starts shooting impatiently at all things and at all times, threaten others and cast the shadow of insecurity over nations and regions.
8. Inefficacy of International Mechanisms to prevail over these challenges and to bring durable peace and security
International organizations and mechanisms clearly lack the capacity to overcome problems and challenges, to put in place fair and just relations and peace, fraternity and security. There is hardly any government or nation that places much hope in these mechanisms to secure its rights or defend its independence, territorial integrity and national interests.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
The challenges are a lot more than the ones I enumerated and I know that you would have presented many more if you wanted to dwell on them, but I chose to confine myself to the ones I stated.
Now, the important and decisive question concerns the roots and causes of these challenges. A scientific and careful analysis shows that the root of the present situation lies in two fundamental factors. Without doubt, the first factor lies in the relations arising from the consequences of the Second World War.
The victors of the war drew the roadmap for global domination and formulated their policies not on the basis of justice but for ensuring the interests of victors over the vanquished nations. Therefore, mechanisms arising from this approach and the related policies have not been capable of finding just solutions for global problems for 60 years. Some big powers still carry the conduct of the victors of a world war and regard other states and nations, even those that had nothing to do with the war, as the vanquished, and humiliate other nations and demand extortion from the condescending position similar to feudals and peasants of the medieval age. They regard themselves superior to others and are not accountable to any government or international body.
Colleagues, Mr. Chairman,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Among all the ineffective organizations, unfortunately, the UN Security Council ranks first. They have created circumstances in which some powers with exclusive and special right to veto in the Security Council act as prosecutor, Judge and executioner, regardless of being a defendant or respondent. It is natural that countries that have been subjected to their infringements have no hope to get what they deserve from the Council.
Unfortunately, humanity has witnessed that in all long wars, like the Korean and Vietnam wars, the war of the Zionists against Palestinians and Lebanon, the war of Saddam against the people of Iran and ethnic wars of Europe and Africa, one of the members of the Security Council was one of the belligerents or supported one party against the other, usually the aggressor, or the conflict itself.
Look at Iraq, they first occupied the country and then received authorization from the Security Council, the same Council in which the same occupiers have the right of veto. Who should the people of Iraq complain about and to where should they take their complaints with hopes of securing their rights? We saw in Lebanon that some powers delayed the decisions of the Security Council hoping for the victory of the Zionist regime. However, when they became disappointed in that usurper regime's victory, they approved of a ceasefire to take effect. But the duty of the Security Council is to prevent the expansion of conflicts, to put in place the ceasefire and promote peace and safety. Who should the people of Lebanon complain about and where should they take their complaints to?
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The presence of some monopolist powers has prevented the Security Council from doing its main duties which are safeguarding peace and security based on justice. The credibility of the council has been tarnished and its efficacy in defending the rights of its members has been destroyed. Many nations have lost their confidence in the Council. Some other mechanisms like the monetary and banking mechanisms are in the same undesirable situation and have been turned into tools for the imposition of the wishes of some powers on other nations. It is evident that these mechanisms are not capable of responding to the current needs and solving the challenges and establishing fair and sustainable relations.
Dear Colleagues,
Again, there is no doubt that the second and more important factor is some big powers' disregard of morals, divine values, the teachings of prophets and directions specified by the all knowing God, as well as the rule of the sinful. How can the sinful that cannot even manage and control themselves, rule humanity and arrange its affairs? Unfortunately, they have put themselves in the position of God! They are in servitude to their own whims and desire to have everything for themselves. For them, human dignity and the lives, properties, and lands of others are no longer important. Humanity has had the deep wound caused by impious powers on its battered body. Today, the problems that people around the world face are mainly rooted in the disregard of human values and morals and also in the management by the impious.
Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The only sustainable way to the betterment of mankind, is the return to the teachings of divine prophets, monotheism, respect for the dignity of humans and the flow of love and affections in all relationships, ties and regulations. Then the structures should be reformed based on these. To fulfill this objective, I invite everybody to line up a front of fraternity, amity and sustainable peace based on monotheism and justice under the name of "Coalition for Peace" to prevent incursions and arrogance and propagate the culture of affection and justice. I hereby announce that with the help of all independent, justice-seeking and peace-loving nations, the Islamic Eepublic of Iran will be treading on this path. Monotheism, Justice and love for humans should dominate all the pillars of the UN and this organization has to be a reference for justice and every member of it has to enjoy equal spiritual and legal support.
The General Assembly as the representative of the international community shall be considered as the most important pillar of the UN in order, free from any pressure and threats of big powers, to take the required measures for reforming the UN structures and especially change the present status of the Security Council, and define new structures based on justice and democracy with the purpose to become responsive to the present requirements and be able to settle the existing challenges leading to the establishment of sustainable stability and security.
Excellencies,
The nuclear issue of Iran is a clear example of the performance of such mechanisms and their prevailing concepts. As you all know, Iran is an official member of the International Atomic Energy Agency and has always observed its rules and regulations and has had the most extensive cooperation with this Agency in all aspects. All our nuclear work has been completely peaceful and transparent. According to the statute of the IAEA, any member has a number of rights and commitments. Actually, any member has to move on the peaceful path and, under the supervision of the Agency, assist other members and is entitled to be supported by the Agency and have access to the fuel cycle with the help the Agency and its members. So far, Iran has fulfilled all its obligations but has been deprived of other members' technical assistance and, even during some periods of time, of the Agency's support. For about 5 years, some of the aforementioned powers tried to deny the Iranian nation its rights by exerting pressure on IAEA.
They derailed Iran's nuclear issue of its legal path and politicized the atmosphere to impose their wishes, taking advantage of all their potentials. Iran spared no effort to build confidence. However, nothing satisfied them except the complete halt of all nuclear activities, even those related to research and university fields. They were only after depriving Iran of all its inalienable rights. Therefore, even those centers not involved in the fuel cycle or not in need of the supervision of the Agency were closed. After three years of negotiation and trying to build confidence, the Iranian nation came to the resolute conviction that the main concern of these powers is not the possible deviation of Iran from the rules and regulations of the Agency, but its scientific progress. If this trend continues, there will be no chance for Iran to enjoy its rights, not even in the next 20 years. Therefore, it has to be decided to follow up the issue on its right legal path that goes through the Agency away from illegitimate and political impositions by the arrogant powers. Of course, the Iranian nation has always been ready and now is prepared for constructive talks.
By abusing the Security Council, the arrogant powers have repeatedly accused Iran and even made military threats against it over the last two years. However, thanks to the faith in God and national unity, Iran has moved forward step by step and now our country is recognized as a country with the capacity for industrial scale fuel cycle production for peaceful uses.
Fortunately, the Agency has recently tried to regain its legal role as supporter of the rights of its members and supervisor of nuclear activities. We see this as a right approach adopted by the Agency. Previously, they illegally wished to politicize the Iranian nation's nuclear case, but today, thanks to the resistance of the Iranian nation, the issue is back at the Agency and I officially announce that in our opinion the nuclear issue of Iran is now closed and has turned into an ordinary matter. Today many questions have been raised on Iranian nuclear activities within IAEA by certain powers which shall be examined properly. Of course Iran has always been prepared to have constructive talks with all parties.
I would like to thank all the nations and countries that, during this hard juncture, defended the legal rights of my nation and motherland and also appreciate the members of the Non-Aligned Movement, our other friends in the Security Council, IAEA's Board of Governors, the committed and law-abiding experts of the Agency and its Director General for their insistence on the law. I would also like to announce that, unlike the monopolist powers, the Iranian nation is ready to offer to other members its experiences in the form of educational programs and based on the obligations of the Agency's statute and under its supervision.
Now I would like to address those who beleaguered the Iranian nation for about five years, offended and accused my people who have contributed to the history and civilization of the world, and to advise them to learn from their recent actions. They mistreated the Iranian nation but they have to be careful not to do the same with other nations and not to sacrifice the integrity of international organizations for the sake of their unlawful wishes. Today the nations of the world are wide awake, vigilant, and resistant. If you reform yourselves, the whole world will be reformed. Nations are inherently good and can coexist peacefully. They'd better try to serve their own people, and be sure that others do not need them. Is it not high time for these powers to return from the path of arrogance and obedience of Satan to the path of Godliness? Do they not like to be cleansed of their impurities, submit to the will of God and believe in him? Faith in God means believing in honesty, purity, justice and loving others!
They can be sure that they will benefit from purity, honesty, justice, loving and respecting human dignity. They can be sure that such attributes are considered to be more appropriate, valuable and beautiful by the nations of the world. This is the invitation of all divine prophets from Adam to Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus Christ and Mohammed. If they answer the invitation, they will be saved and if they don't, the same thing that befell the people of the past will befall them.
According to holy Koran:
"One who does not answer the divine call should not think that he has weakened God on earth; he has no companion but God and he is clearly engulfed by darkness".
They have nothing of their own and cannot escape from the dominion of the rule of God and his will.
In this important gathering, I have to remind them of the following words of the Almighty in the Holy Quran:
"Do they not look at the powers and governments which came before them? If the people of the past had actually possessed something, they would have kept it and would not have let you to posses it now. God destroyed them because of their sins and nobody could protect them against the will of God".
They have to know that the ways and traditions based on oppression and injustice will be destroyed. Do they not see the signs of vigilance and resistance based on monotheism, philanthropy and the justice-seeking spirit of the nations of the world? Do they not notice the imminent fall of empires?
I hope that this invitation will have a practical answer.
Excellencies,
Nations and countries don't have to obey the injustice of certain powers. These powers, because of the reasons already mentioned, have lost the competence to lead the world because of their hideous acts. I officially declare that the age of relations arising from the Second World War as well as materialistic thoughts based on arrogance and domination is well over now. Humanity has passed a perilous precipice and the age of monotheism, purity, affinity, respecting others, justice and true peace loving has commenced. It is the divine promise that the truth will be victorious and the earth will be inherited by the righteous. You, who are free, believers and the people of the world, put your trust in God. You, who crave for high values, wherever you are, try to prepare the grounds for the fulfillment of this great divine promise by serving the people and seeking justice.
The age of darkness will end, the prisoners will come back home, the occupied lands will be freed, Palestine and Iraq will be liberated from the domination of the occupiers and the people of Europe will be free of the pressures exerted by the Zionists. The tenderhearted and humanity loving governments will replace the aggressive and domineering ones. Human dignity will be regained. The pleasing aroma of justice will permeate the world and people will live together in a brotherly and affectionate manner. Striving in this way to give the rule to the righteous and the Promised One is actually the final cure for the wounds of humanity, the solution of all problems, and the establishment of love, beauty, justice and happiness all over the world. This belief and endeavor is the key to unity and constructive interactions among nations, countries, the people of the world and all true justice seekers.
Without any doubt, the Promised One who is the final Savior and the last heavenly message will come. In the company of all believers, justice-seekers and benefactors, he will establish the bright future and fill the world with justice and beauty. This is the promise of God, therefore it will be fulfilled. Let us have a role in the fulfillment of all this glory and beauty.
I wish for the bright future for all human beings and the dawn of liberation and freedom for all humans and the rule of love and affections all around the world as well as the elimination of oppression, hatred and violence. A wish which I think will be realized in the near future.
Source
September 20, 2007
New Interview on CBS Program 60 Minutes (complete)
SCOTT PELLEY: Do you have a greeting to the American people?
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful, I would like to greet the American people and the good nations around the world. Right now we are in the city of Tehran. It's in the afternoon of an autumn day. We're in the open air in a garden. And the air is pleasant. And fall, little by little, is settling in, mixing with the summer breeze, I guess. And I think that right now, you have different time zones obviously and different climates. You have early morning in the U.S. and other time zones perhaps approaching noon. So once again, greetings to you. I very much hope that nations around the world start their days with peace, friendship, and happiness.
PELLEY: Mr. President, do you intend to press your request to visit the World Trade Center site in New York?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, it was included in my program, if we have the time and the conditions are conducive, I will try to do that.
PELLEY: But the New York Police Department and others do not appear to want you there. Do you intend to go there anyway?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, over there, local officials need to make the necessary coordinations. If they can't do that, I won't insist.
PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.
AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?
PELLEY: Well, sir, you're the head of government of an Islamist state that the United States government says is a major exporter of terrorism around the world.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I wouldn't say that what the American government says is the prerequisite here. Something happened there which led to other events. Many innocent people were killed there. Some of those people were American citizens obviously. We obviously are very much against any terrorist action and any killing. And also we are very much against any plots to sow the seeds of discord among nations. Usually you go to these sites to pay your respects. And also to perhaps air your views about the root causes of such incidents. I think that when I do that, I will be paying, as I said earlier, my respect to the American nation.
PELLEY: But the American people, sir, believe that your country is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans, as if to be mocking the American people.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I'm amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?
PELLEY: Well, the American nation . . .
AHMADINEJAD: . . . you are representing a media and you're a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there. I would like to think that the points of view of the American people is very close to the points of view of the Iranian people. The American people are very much against and opposed to what certain American officials are saying and their points of view. And also the way that the people have voted in the American elections is very telling. And we are criticizing such behavior on the part of the American government. We believe that if anyone just allows himself to accuse others, there will be no possibility for peace and friendship.
PELLEY: What do you mean the American election is telling? What did you take from it?
AHMADINEJAD: What I'm saying is that the American people very clearly have shown that they do not endorse what certain American officials are saying and doing. I remind you of the rallies in Washington a couple of days ago. What were they saying and shouting? Perhaps 70, 80 percent of the American people are against their troops, their sons and daughters being in Iraq and war. And as I said, they're very much against war. And for that matter, the American people are peace-loving people. You shouldn't think that what the American officials are doing and their behavior reflects completely the mood of the American people. And American officials must not make the American people a victim of their wants and wishes. And we make a distinction between the American people and American officials. And the American people are opposed to occupation, the use of force, and also terrorism, the killing of the people of other nations. And this is what we are saying. This is what we believe in. With that in mind, we feel very close to the American people. And I'm sure that this is reciprocal. A couple of days ago, an American scientist, a scholar, wrote to me saying that he has a great love for Iran. And once he passes, he wants to be buried in this country. The two nations are very close to one another.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you say that the two nations are very close to one another, but it is an established fact now that Iranian bombs and Iranian know-how are killing Americans in Iraq. You have American blood on your hands. Why?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, this is what the American officials are saying. Again, American officials wherever around the world that they encounter a problem which they fail to resolve, instead of accepting that, they prefer to accuse others. We basically are very much opposed to any kind of insecurity inside Iraq. Because once we have insecurity in Iraq, the first party that will be affected would be Iran. Having said that, we fully oppose occupation and also military attacks. In Iraq we don't need to do that. For that matter, in any part of the world we don't need to do that. When it comes to war, we don't think that war, belligerence, is a good solution for differences of opinion. We have said in the past to American officials that the Iraqi people very much oppose occupation. And they will not accept this. And experience tells you this. This is a nation with many thousands of years of history. They have stood up to occupiers in the past, and they will stand up again. I'm very sorry that, because of the wrong decisions taken by American officials, Iraqi people are being killed and also American soldiers. It's very regrettable. And, again, I'm saying that why should they be killed? Why should these boys and girls be killed? Why should we have war in Iraq and insecurity? I believe that the people behind the insecurity are those who, from thousands of kilometers away, have brought in troops. First, they said that they want to topple the dictator and find WMDs [weapons of mass destruction]. They didn't find WMDs and there's no dictator there anymore. So the question is: What are American troops doing right now in Iraq? They have to answer, respond to these questions. We are not interfering in Iraq. The Iraqi people are our friends. And the president, the prime minister, the speaker of the parliament are our friends. We don't need to interfere in Iraq. We are two nations which have been connected through history. Each year millions of Iranians go to Iraq for pilgrimage. And in a number of these bombings inside Iraq, Iranian citizens have been killed. We want peace; we want security in Iraq; and it only serves our own interests. And those American officials who see the interest in a continued occupation of Iraq, I ask them to reconsider. They should leave alone the Iraqi nation and also their own soldiers. And they shouldn't accuse others needlessly. We basically oppose the killing of any person, innocent persons, from any race or community. As I said, the Iraqi people have been victimized. We feel very sad for them. Equally, we feel sad for American soldiers and troops because they don't know why they're there. They are the victims of the, if you will, the wants and wishes of certain American officials.
PELLEY: Mr. President, American men and women are being killed by your weapons in Iraq. You know this.
AHMADINEJAD: No, no, no.
PELLEY: Why are those weapons there?
AHMADINEJAD: Who's saying that?
PELLEY: The American Army has captured Iranian missiles in Iraq. The critical elements of the explosively formed penetrator bombs that are killing so many people are coming from Iran. There's no doubt about that anymore. The denials are no longer credible, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Very good. If I may: Are you an American politician? Am I to look at you as an American politician or a reporter? This is what the American officials are claiming. Well, we don't need to arrest many people to prove that Americans are occupying Iraq or produce fabricated documents. If you go to the streets of Baghdad, you will see American helicopters and tanks and Humvees, so on and so forth. So the Iraqi people are just defending themselves. I think the way out for the American official from this problem that it has created for itself shouldn't be in accusing Iran. You need to understand the realities of the region and also respect the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people, like other people, want to have security, want to have peace, want to be free. When they see that soldiers come into their houses, they react. So if the American government does accept this reality, this truth, everything will changes. If they accuse us 1,000 times, the truth will not change. They need to accept the truth and also the wishes of the Iraqi people. That is a way out of this deadlock.
PELLEY: Mr. President, I want to be very direct and very clear. Many Americans believe that you have American blood on your hands. Are you saying that it is not the policy of this government to send weapons into Iraq? Sir, forgive me, you're smiling, but this is a very serious matter to America.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, it's serious for us as well. I daresay it's serious for everyone. I'm just amazed as the representative of the media, why do you insist on the untrue accusations leveled by your government? This doesn't solve anything. It seems to me it's laughable for someone to turn a blind eye to the truth and accuse others. It doesn't help. And the reason that I'm smiling, again, it's because that the picture is so clear. But American officials refuse to see it. And I think that as a member of the media, your responsibility here is to talk about the truth and back home to force your officials to appreciate the truth and take the correct decision. The problem in Iraq doesn't have anything to do with the Iraqi people. For that matter the killing of American troops doesn't have anything to do with the Iraqi people. And as we have security, things will be better. And we don't want to see a single soldier killed. The solutions we are putting on the table are very humane. And, again, we are asking for very basic things from the American officials, to respect the wishes of the Iraqi people and also their rights. A dictator has been toppled and WMDs have not been found. If they persist on the same course for 50 years and arrest diplomats, so on and so forth, this will not help with the situation. And if you repeat the mistakes of the past, nothing will get resolved.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you must have rejoiced more than anyone when Saddam Hussein fell. You owe President Bush. This is one of the best things that's ever happened to your country.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I have said this in another interview. Once the dictator was toppled, many people were happy. But the American government did not appropriately use this golden opportunity. Again, this happened sometime ago and it pleased the Iraqi people. They could have used this much better. They should have left the Iraqi people to go their own way and to determine their own fate and to live like other nations in this part of the world. Well, initially, we might have had the impression that American officials want to redeem themselves and the mistakes they have made in the past. Because for eight years they supported Saddam against my nation. Many hundreds of thousands of people were killed. Thousands of people were chemically bombarded. Many people were killed in their own houses. This very city of Tehran was the target of more than 100 missiles. Many people were killed in Tehran. But Saddam was being supported by American officials. So once American officials announced that they were going to deal with Saddam, our first impression was that they're going to make amends for their past behavior. We have every hope and we were happy. But once Saddam went away, they didn't find any weapons, American officials later announced that we are here to stay in Iraq. So there was a question: Why do you want to be there? Why do you want to stay behind? Do you think that the Iraqi people cannot take care of themselves? They can determine their own fate. I think that their first and biggest mistake was to remain in Iraq. If they had left Iraq, that would have helped with positive interaction between the American government and the peoples of the region. But they stayed behind and they appointed an American administrator and they tried to influence the elections and also the future government in Iraq, and later they tried to sow the seeds of discord and also give a free hand to terrorist groups to come inside Iraq. So once a country is occupied, its security is the responsibility of the occupation. However, they have to answer for all of these. Many thousands of American soldiers have been killed. They need to answer for their action. Instead of answering these questions, they are accusing others. So initially we welcomed the developments, but once it continued, this is very regrettable.
PELLEY: Mr. President, can you tell me that you are not sending weapons to Iraq? Very simple. Very directly.
AHMADINEJAD: We don't need to do that. We are very much opposed to war and insecurity in Iraq.
PELLEY: Is that "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: It's very clear, the situation. The insecurity in Iraq is detrimental to our interests. We have more than 1,000 kilometers of common borders with Iraq. Each year, many millions of Iranians go to Iraq and millions of Iraqis come to Iran. So we are very unhappy with the insecurity. We are doing our very best to help with security. For security, we decided to sit down and talk with Americans in Iraq.
PELLEY: As a goodwill gesture, will you say right now in this interview that you will do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, Iranian forces are not inside Iraq. Can you show me one?
PELLEY: No sir, Iranian arms, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Please, allow me to continue. Please, allow me to finish my thought. The American government has admitted that with more than 160,000 troops, state-of-the-art military equipment, they have failed to control and put a stop to the activities of these few people. That's very unfortunate. You shouldn't accuse others because you have certain problems yourself. Very clearly, we are friends to all. We very much are saddened with war. We are very much saddened that American troops are being killed, losing their lives over there. So you don't know the people of the region. I think that the British government was smarter. They left the city of Basra, pulled out their forces. And once the British soldiers left the city, the local people celebrated. And today, unfortunately, you're opposing the Iraqi people. You could have stood side by side with the Iraqi people. Again, whenever you correct your policies, it helps everyone. It benefits you. It benefits Iraq. It benefits all the peoples of the region. We're using everything in our power to provide security in Iraq. We have said so on many occasions. Whoever is killed in Iraq, that would sadden us.
PELLEY: Mr. President, we appreciate your thoughts. Some people watching this interview, frankly, will think that you're dodging the questions because many of the questions that I ask you are fairly straightforward "yes" or "no" questions. And let me try this one again, if I may. Will you pledge tonight to do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq? Can you make that pledge?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I think you have been charged with a mission to repeat a sentence over and over again. My comments are very clear. I think that you should go back and take American officials to task. Use the same force you're using right now so that they take the troops out.
PELLEY: Was that a "yes" or a "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: If you are to take sides, well, I don't know. Well, you shouldn't tell me what kind of answer I should give to you. You're free to ask me questions. I didn't put any limitations on your questions.
PELLEY: True.
AHMADINEJAD: I'm free to give my own answers. I think that all of us should go to American officials and ask them: "What are you looking for in Iraq? Let's be clear. Why have you stayed behind? Why are you accusing others? And your policies have created insecurity. You are behind terrorism. So once you correct your ways, these things will take care of themselves. Why are you using a road that goes to nowhere? Use the correct road. We support the rights of all nations. We love all nations. And the message of the Iranian people is friendship with all. In our history, we have never attacked another country, occupied another country. This is a peace-loving nation. And you should remember that we are living within our borders. And people who have brought troops from thousands of miles away, they are the ones who should be held accountable and responsible.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you say you love all nations. I have to assume that includes the Nation of Israel.
AHMADINEJAD: Israel is not a nation. Well, we like the people, yes, because they are victims as well. They used to live in their own countries, in their own cities. They were given empty promises, false promises. They said that we are going to give you jobs, we are going to give you security. And they pushed the local Palestinian people out and made them refugees and also made refugees of another community. In other words, from thousands of miles away, people have been emigrating to this country and they are living in fear every day. And we feel for them. Last year in my speech I said that the Zionist entity should open the borders and the gates. Let the people decide where they want to go and settle. They are good people as well. We have no bones to pick with them. We are against terrorism. We are against wrong policies. We are friends with all people, Jewish people, Christians, different people of different faiths. We are, well, we're in contact with them. Here in Iran there are Jewish communities; there are Christian communities; we're all friends. Also, non-Muslim countries, we help them when a natural calamity breaks. We love all people. We are opposed to Zionism, occupation, terrorism, dropping bombs on people when they are inside their own homes, killing men, women, and children. Very openly I have said time and again that I oppose these.
PELLEY: If the Palestinians reach an agreement with Israel for a two-state solution, will you then recognize Israel as well?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, the decision rests with the Palestinian people. This is exactly what I'm saying.
PELLEY: What would you do, sir?
AHMADINEJAD: What we are saying, our solution for Palestine is a humane one. We are saying that you should allow the Palestinian people to participate in a fair and free election and determine their own fate. Whatever decision they take, everyone should go with that.
PELLEY: And if that decision . . .
AHMADINEJAD: No other party must interfere. We are not telling the Palestinian people what decisions they should take. Let them make their own decision. Whatever decision they take, we will go for that.
PELLEY: And if that decision is a two-state solution, you're good with that? You could support a two-state solution?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, why are you prejudging what will happen? Let's pave the ground first for a free and fair choice. And once they make their choice, we must respect that. All the Palestinian people must be given this opportunity, allow them to make their own decisions. Let us not tell them what course of action they need to take.
PELLEY: You have said in the past that you have 3,000 centrifuges in a line producing highly-enriched uranium. Do you have more now?
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: No. Our plan and program is very transparent. We are under the supervision of the agency. Everything is on the table. We have nothing to hide.
PELLEY: Transparent? Sir, it's been hidden for more than 15 years. You've been operating a secret nuclear program. It's nothing if it's not secret.
AHMADINEJAD: Who is saying that?
PELLEY: Well, the IAEA. You've, in fact, agreed with the IAEA to confess what you've done in secret over the past years. It is not transparent, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Very good. I think that you are not familiar with the structure and the laws and the regulations of the agency. The agency is supposed to do two things. One, supervision. The other, support for the member states. The agency is supposed to supervise and ask questions and we respond. Interestingly enough, in all agency reports, you will read that there are no signs of diversion on the part of the Iranian people. In no reports. But naturally, the agency has questions to ask. And when it comes to that, interestingly enough, compared to European countries and other countries, the questions they ask us are far fewer. They have scores of questions to ask other countries. But the U.S. and a number of other countries are politicizing matters. They don't want us to progress, to develop. So maybe it would be best if you ask the agency how many questions they have asked the U.S. and European countries for that matter. Scores of questions. Because they are producing bombs, new generations of nuclear bombs, they are fabricating those. And our activities are very peaceful under the supervision of the agency. We have provided the largest amount of cooperation to the agency. And what we are doing is very transparent.
PELLEY: For the sake of clarity, because there is so much concern in the world about this next question, please give me the most direct answer you can. Is it your goal to build a nuclear bomb?
AHMADINEJAD: What are you driving at?
PELLEY: Simply that, sir. Is it the goal of your government, the goal of this nation to build a nuclear weapon?
AHMADINEJAD: Do you think that the nuclear technology is only limited in a bomb? You can only build a bomb with that?
PELLEY: No, I appreciate the differences, sir, but the question is limited to the bomb.
AHMADINEJAD: It has different uses. Well, you have to appreciate we don't need a nuclear bomb. We don't need that. What needs do we have for a bomb?
PELLEY: May I take that as a "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: Please, let me finish my thought. It is a firm "no." I'm going to be much firmer now. I want to address all politicians around the world, statesmen. Any party who uses national revenues to make a bomb, a nuclear bomb, will make a mistake. Because in political relations right now, the nuclear bomb is of no use. If it was useful, it would have prevented the downfall of the Soviet Union. If it was useful, it would have resolved the problems the Americans have in Iraq. The U.S. has tested new generations of bombs, many thousands of warheads you have in your arsenals. It's of no use. And also the Zionist entity, they have hundreds of warheads. It's not going to help them. The time of the bomb is past. The parties who think that by using the bomb you can control others, they are wrong. Today we are living in the era of intellectual pursuits. You should spend your money on your people. We don't need the bomb. For 28 years we have defended ourselves in the face of enemy onslaught. Every day we are becoming more powerful. And, again, we don't need such weapons. In fact, we think that this is inhuman. So can you please tell me why the U.S. government is fabricating these bombs? Do you want to provide more welfare, happiness to the people through the bomb? Are you going to deal with global poverty? Or do you want to kill people? So our belief, sir, tell us and also our culture, because of these, we are very much opposed to the killing of people. This is very clear.
PELLEY: At the moment, our two countries may very well be walking down the road to war. How do you convince President Bush, how do you convince other nations in the West . . . .
AHMADINEJAD: What two parties are walking towards war?
PELLEY: Iran, the United States, Western countries. France this week . . . .
AHMADINEJAD: Who says that?
PELLEY: France this week said that war might be indicated. How do you convince these Western powers that you are not pursuing a bomb?
AHMADEINEJAD: You haven't read the latest news, I have to say. It's wrong to think that Iran and the U.S. are walking towards war. Who says so? Why should we go to war? What reasons are there for the two countries to go to war? We have a logic which we have announced for some time now. We very much oppose the behavior of the U.S. administration. We think it's wrong. And we are saying what we feel, and you are free to say what you feel. And people have a right to choose. Why should we go to war over that? If having said that is a part of a psychological warfare plot, the American people are well familiar with these plots. You shouldn't make the American people afraid needlessly. There's no war in the offing. And also I think that certain American officials do not want friendly relations between the two countries and the citizens of the two countries to visit each other. Last year we requested for a direct flight between the two countries because we want to promote trade, promote cultural activities, and also people-to-people contact. But the American government opposed that. There is no war in the offing. Again, this is psychological warfare. If you have differences of opinions, you can use logic to resolve your differences.
PELLEY: You can show the world today that you are not pursuing a bomb. All you have to do is give the order. Open your nuclear facilities. Let the United Nations inspectors in there today and prove that there is no bomb program. Why not take that course?
AHMADEINEJAD: I think that you are a little bit behind the day's news. You might have been away on an assignment. I don't know.
PELLEY: I'm familiar with the day's news.
AHMADEINEJAD: The reports say that we have been complying. And they are inspecting all of our sites every day. What more am I supposed to do? So, I try to be as frank as possible, but . . . .
PELLEY: You're opening the sites slowly over time, sir. People say that you're just trying to gather as much highly-enriched uranium as you possibly can.
AHMADEINEJAD: No. No. No. Well, should you say this, make these accusations or agency inspectors? Inspectors have said that Iran has not diverted; there's no diversion here, in other words. Again, let me repeat. We have not diverted from a peaceful path. This is what the agencies think. There is a solution here, however, a very simple solution. The countries that have atomic bombs should destroy their stockpiles. And that would make everyone happy. You shouldn't accuse others needlessly, and you shouldn't lose your temper and make life miserable for others as well. They have made mistakes and have diverted themselves. They think that others will do the same. There are many countries which have the technology. Five or six have diverted from the peaceful path, road, rather. So those five or six should return to the correct path. If certain parties think that they have rights which go beyond the normal rights that any nation should have, that will be problematic. I think that the American government should appreciate that it is like any other member of the international community, respect the views of the agency. It's very regrettable to see that certain U.S. officials have insulted the very clear positions taken by the agency, and they have lost their temper. And also they have made threats. They have attacked the director general of the agency. That is shameful. If you think that the agency is a reputable one, you should allow it to go ahead with its business. Why should you, or the agency, for that matter, repeat the words of the secretary of state? Rather, what they need to do is report the facts, the truth. So the problems of the American politicians is because they are interested in their own interests. And they want the rest of the world just to say "yes, sir" and go along with whatever they say. That is finished. It's in the past.
PELLEY: What trait do you admire in President Bush?
AHMADINEJAD: Again, I have a very frank tone. I think that President Bush needs to correct his ways.
PELLEY: What do you admire about him?
AHMADEINEJAD: He should respect the American people.
PELLEY: Is there anything? Any trait?
AHMADINEJAD: As an American citizen, tell me what trait do you admire?
PELLEY: Well, Mr. Bush is, without question, a very religious man, for example, as you are. I wonder if there's anything that you've seen in President Bush that you admire.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, is Mr. Bush a religious man?
PELLEY: Very much so. As you are.
AHMADEINEJAD: What religion, please tell me, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people? Please tell me. Does Christianity tell its followers to do that? Judaism, for that matter? Islam, for that matter? What prophet tells you to send 160,000 troops to another country, kill men, women, and children? You just can't wear your religion on your sleeve or just go to church. You should be truthfully religious. Religion tells us all that you should respect the property, the life of different people. Respect human rights. Love your fellow man. And once you hear that a person has been killed, you should be saddened. You shouldn't sit in a room, a dark room, and hatch plots. And because of your plots, many thousands of people are killed. Having said that, we respect the American people. And because of our respect for the American people, we respectfully talk with President Bush. We have a respectful tone. But having said that, I don't think that that is a good definition of religion. Religion is love for your fellow man, brotherhood, telling the truth.
PELLEY: I take it you can't think of anything you like about President Bush.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, I'm not familiar with the gentleman's private life. Maybe in his private life he is very kind or a determined man. I'm not aware of that. I base my judgment on what I see in his public life. Having said that, I think that President Bush can behave much better. There were golden opportunities for President Bush. He should have used them better.
PELLEY: I asked President Bush what he would say to you if he were sitting in this chair. And he told me, quote, speaking to you, that you've made terrible choices for your people. You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world. These are President Bush's words to you. What's your reply to the president?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, President Bush is free to think as he pleases and to say what he pleases. I don't oppose freedom of speech. I believe in freedom of speech. President Bush is free to say what he pleases. But these would not change the truth. So that President Bush knows the Iranian people are dearly loved today. We can very well put this to the test to find out who has become isolated. Again, maybe one of my friends could go to another country and a friend of President Bush could go to the same country, find out which one of us is isolated. You're free to choose any country you like. I don't think that President Bush has said these things. Rather, I prefer to think that this is your impression of what the president has said.
PELLEY: I'm quoting the president directly for the record.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is a direct quote? So, well, this tells me that there's a great divide between us.
PELLEY: Why does your government confiscate your people's satellite dishes? What is it that you don't want your people to see?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, it's not prohibited like that. After everything is said and done, this is a law passed by the Iranian parliament. And the members of the parliament have been chosen by the people. Having said that, the Iranian people are, by and large, using satellite television. You can go out on the streets and see this for yourself.
PELLEY: But as you well know, they are confiscated from time to time in sweeps in the country. And I wonder what it is that you don't want your people to see.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, again, this is the law. Our people are free and express their opinion about all matters internationally. They are well aware of international news. Having said that, I like to think that the Iranian people is one of the most well-informed nations. You can go to the street and ask the people yourself. Reporters from other countries go to different Iranian cities, they're free to move about and ask questions. But Iranian reporters cannot do the same in the U.S. You can very easily come and see me and just ask me questions, but our reporters cannot ask questions from American officials. Our interview today is going to be aired byIranian TV. I very much hope that Iranian reporters will be given a possibility to ask questions from American officials. Then the truth will be uncovered.
PELLEY: You know, I'm curious. Looking back over the years, do you believe today that taking the American hostages in 1979 was a mistake?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, you have to deal with different things in their own time. If you go back in time, things will go wrong. If you go back 500 years, what happened in Europe and the U.S. for that matter. You shouldn't look back at what happened in the past. Have your sights towards the future. This wouldn't help with anything. Because if you are to do that, we have to go over the dossier of the activities of various American administrations in this country from 1958 onwards. That wouldn't be a pretty picture. I don't want to talk about and think about the dark passages of our history. Let's have our sights towards the future.
PELLEY: Mr. President, I just have a few questions. We have appreciated your answers very much, and I know we're pressing on time here. We would be very grateful if you wouldn't mind taking just a few more. Will you, in this interview tonight, rule out the possibility of a nuclear test of an Iranian weapon during your presidency?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, we don't have any plans.
PELLEY: But rule it out. Say that "we will not test a nuclear device as long as I am president." Can you say that?
AHMADINEJAD: Actually, I very much oppose this behavior. Picture it. If an Iranian reporter kept repeatedly asking the same questions from a U.S. official, how would you feel? Would you feel good about that?
PELLEY: I would.
AHMADINEJAD: I think that instead of going astray here and misleading the public, we should try to help with the uncovering of the truth. You are a member of the media. You are not a government official. You should be concerned with the truth. We should all be concerned with the truth. We don't need such weapons. Those who don't have anything to say to other nations and deal with them, they resort to atomic weapons. We are a cultured people and we have good relations with all nations. And the status of a country has nothing to do with atomic weapons, rather its culture and its civilization. And whenever we make a decision, we are courageous enough to come out and say that we have made such a decision. Whatever we want to do, we have nothing to hide. We clearly will announce that. Well, I said sometime ago that if you sanction us, we are going to take the production to an industrial scale, and we did that. And we said that we will continue to push ahead undaunted. We did that. We have no problems. When it comes to that, we are very transparent and we have a frank tone of voice. Let me be frank and very straightforward here. I oppose the unilateral policies and bullying policies of the American administration. I believe that these lead to war, lead to greater poverty and killing. I believe that you can manage the war better through friendship, mutual respect, and by respecting laws and also fair play. Again, I'm being very frank here. I oppose the very idea of the bomb. I have nothing to hide. Also, I oppose the policies of the American administration.
PELLEY: If the United Nations Security Council or the European Union votes in favor of additional sanctions against your country, what will you do?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, they are just trapping themselves. They can become trapped themselves. Because any person or party who insists on a wrong decision, that will be problematic for him, no other person. For 28 years now we have been under political pressure and economic sanctions. What happened? Nothing. And the Iranian people have managed to push ahead with technology. Our economy is growing each day. And, of course, having said that, I think that that course of action is highly unlikely. There are wise people in different countries which will not go ahead with this. Iran is a member of the agency. We're under the supervision of the agency. The agency's reports are very transparent. We have provided the fullest amount of cooperation to the agency. If a party wants to go beyond the law, this will be to their own detriment. I have said time and again you can do nothing to this country. This is a great country. We have extensive God-given riches and resources. From a political point of view, we are strong and powerful. And under any conditions, we will manage to push ahead. But they need to appreciate that having said that, I don't think that such a thing is possible. Again, a number of American officials want this to happen. But you shouldn't worry about that. Just say that this is not going to happen.
PELLEY: If sanctions do occur, if another round of sanctions occur, you will continue to enrich uranium behind closed doors, I take it.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is not going to happen. I have talked extensively about this. Nobody is able to impose an unlawful course of action on the Iranian people. The Iranian people will not abide by that, accept that. And it will not serve their interests to do that. Both the American government and other countries, it helps them if they are friends with Iran. As a friend, I need to tell you to take this route. Again, you're free to take any route you want. And you will have to go with the repercussions. So these past few years, what has it gotten you? And the conditions will not change to benefit them; I assure you of that.
PELLEY: Would an attack on your nuclear sites, in your opinion, give you leave to attack U.S. forces in the region or the U.S. mainland?
AHMADEINEJAD: Who is going to attack this country?
PELLEY: President Bush has pledged that you will not be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon and will use military force if necessary.
AHMADEINEJAD: I think Mr. Bush, if he wants his party to win the next election, there are cheaper ways to go about this. I can very well give him a few ideas so that the people vote for him. He should respect the American people. They should not bug the telephone conversations of their citizens. They should not kill the sons and daughters of the American nation. They should not squander the taxpayers' money and give them to weapons companies. And also help the people, the victims of Katrina. People will vote for them if they do these things. But if they insist on what they are saying right now, this will not help them. Again, nobody can hurt the Iranian people. And history tells us that the people who have been less than kind to the Iranian people, they have lost out. What I'm saying, I am being very sincere here. I'm a Muslim. I cannot tell a lie. I am supposed to tell the truth. What I'm saying is that President Bush's conduct in Iraq is wrong. And his wrong conduct is behind his party losing the previous elections. This is very clear. The American people are very much dismayed with the behavior and the conduct of the present administration. They are not dismayed with Iran. In fact, the two nations are very close to one another. An example of that would be the letter sent to me by an American scholar a few days ago.
PELLEY: You mentioned telling the truth as a Muslim, and as you know so much better than I do, Verse 42 of the second sura: "The truth shall not be obscured by falsehood, and those who know the truth must tell it." But when I ask you a question as direct as "Will you pledge not to test a nuclear weapon?" you dance all around the question. You never say "yes." You never say "no."
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, thank you for that. You are like a CIA investigator. And you are . . .
PELLEY: I am just a reporter. I am a simple, average American reporter.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is not a Baghdad prison. Please, this is not a secret prison in Europe. This is not Abu Ghraib. This is Iran. I'm the president of this country. Well, I think that I've gone beyond what you've asked me, above and beyond. And I think that if you speak to your job as a reporter, what I have said so far, again, goes above and beyond what you ask me.
PELLEY: One last thing. So important for the American people to understand. When your airplane approaches Manhattan this week, you will look out the window and you will see that the World Trade Center is gone. Many Americans, Mr. President, to be frank, believe that you look out that window and you say to yourself, "Good. Somebody got 'em." They believe our countries are enemies.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, you shouldn't speak on behalf of the American people. I can speak on behalf of the Iranian people, but you cannot speak on behalf of the American people. Why do you insist on doing that? Why do you not allow the American people to speak for themselves? Why? Let them speak for themselves. The people gathered around the White House a couple of days ago. They spoke whatever was in their hearts and minds. Are they not American citizens? Hundreds of thousands of people have rallied against the war. Are they not citizens? Our government at the time expressed its condemnation. We issued an official communiqué condemning that incident. How can you, in your mind, accuse and condemn others? Well, if an Iranian person for that matter had done the same thing, it would have been shameful, and it would not have been fair. So, again, this is not fair. Maybe this is your point of view or also perhaps your editor's point of view. And you are saying that the American people are saying these things. The American people still don't know who was behind the bombing of the Twin Towers. Many books in the U.S. have been written about the incident., and there are questions circling in your society. Once you go back, go to the streets, ask the local people who was behind this, what were the reason for that? And, again, I fail to see why you continually say “the American people.“ I have the latest surveys. Eighty percent of the American citizens say that the American government knew about the attack beforehand. They had information.
PELLEY: You don't believe that, sir.
AHMADEINEJAD: I'm not making a judgment here, mind you. I'm not being judgmental. That's not important for me. What is important for me is to find out why this happened. We can take a course of action which ensures this never happens. Why should we manage the world like this? It's very possible for us all to be friends, for the world to be in peace, and for the family of man to love one another and to not hate one another. So who propagates these ideas, I ask you. We should all be friends. We should deal fairly with one another, respect one another. Nations do not have any problems when it comes to interacting with one another. Unethical politicians make war. Nations don't make war. We're saying that you should allow our nations to be friends with one another. We condemned that incident right there and then. Why should many innocent people be killed? For what reason? Well, behind this building there is another building, a building which in 1981, some 25 years ago, the Iranian president and the prime minister in the office, they were blown up by terrorists, a bomb planted by terrorists. And the president and the prime minister burned in that bomb, by that bomb. And, again, this is very regrettable that those terrorists, which were behind that bombing and other assassinations in this country, can freely have access to American officials abd are being protected by the American Army in Iraq. So this country is a victim of terrorism throughout its history. So you cannot produce even one document, a single document, about terrorist action on the part of the Iranian government or Iranian officials. We are very clear in our position. We say that we spiritually support the right of the Palestinian people and also independence for Iraq. We have nothing to hide. We are very much opposed to the Iraqi occupation. Again, we have nothing to hide. It's very regrettable that many thousands of people were killed in the Twin Towers incident. We have announced time and again. And what we are asking is can we do something that ensures this never happens? And the answer is "yes." We can do that, providing a number of parties do not establish terrorist organizations and set them off on nations. We know who is behind terrorist organizations. You know full well who is behind a number of terrorist organizations around my part of the world, that is. Who provided them with logistical support, political support? It's a very well-known fact they have made and created these terrorist organizations themselves.
PELLEY: Who, sir?
AHMADINEJAD: It's very clear. Very clear.
PELLEY: Make it clearer. Name the names.
AHMADEINEJAD: I don't want to name names. But the terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, who is behind them? And what intelligence organization belonging to what country is behind them? This is very clear.
PELLEY: Shall I say CIA and the United States? Will that . . .
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, maybe you know something that . . . The relations and the developments in this part of the world are somewhat clear. I don't want to say something which would agitate and fan the flames of the situation. What I'm saying is that this is shameful. My country is a great victim of terrorism. We very much oppose terrorism. As I said, we oppose terrorism. Why? Why should innocent people be killed? For what reason? We are saying that each and every person should be respected regardless of their color, creed, what country they come from, what language they speak. We're all fellow human beings. We should be respected. Why some parties ask more than their fair share? Why do they insult nations? They shouldn't do that. This is not right. Who created secret prisons in Europe? You don't know that? Did Iran establish those prisons? This one is very clear and the documents have been revealed. Why are they creating secret prisons? If the law provides the possibility to establish these prisons, go ahead. Why this skullduggery? So this is, again, very clear.
PELLEY: Would you reestablish diplomatic relations with the United States? Is that something you want? Something you would do right away?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, our foreign policy is a policy which says that we should have relations with all countries and nations. Before the revolution, this country was much damaged by American policy. Our late imam said that we will not have relations with two countries: one, the apartheid regime of South Africa; the other, the Zionist regime. We like to have relations with all countries. The American administration cut off relations themselves unilaterally. The Carter administration perhaps were thinking that this would be to their benefit. But this didn't happen. We would like to have relations with all countries based on mutual respect. This is the very basis of our foreign policy. I think that we are done.
PELLEY: You have been generous with your time, Mr. President. Thank you for your time very much.
AHMADEINEJAD: Good luck.
Source
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: In the name of God, the compassionate, the merciful, I would like to greet the American people and the good nations around the world. Right now we are in the city of Tehran. It's in the afternoon of an autumn day. We're in the open air in a garden. And the air is pleasant. And fall, little by little, is settling in, mixing with the summer breeze, I guess. And I think that right now, you have different time zones obviously and different climates. You have early morning in the U.S. and other time zones perhaps approaching noon. So once again, greetings to you. I very much hope that nations around the world start their days with peace, friendship, and happiness.
PELLEY: Mr. President, do you intend to press your request to visit the World Trade Center site in New York?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, it was included in my program, if we have the time and the conditions are conducive, I will try to do that.
PELLEY: But the New York Police Department and others do not appear to want you there. Do you intend to go there anyway?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, over there, local officials need to make the necessary coordinations. If they can't do that, I won't insist.
PELLEY: Sir, what were you thinking? The World Trade Center site is the most sensitive place in the American heart, and you must have known that visiting there would be insulting to many, many Americans.
AHMADINEJAD: Why should it be insulting?
PELLEY: Well, sir, you're the head of government of an Islamist state that the United States government says is a major exporter of terrorism around the world.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I wouldn't say that what the American government says is the prerequisite here. Something happened there which led to other events. Many innocent people were killed there. Some of those people were American citizens obviously. We obviously are very much against any terrorist action and any killing. And also we are very much against any plots to sow the seeds of discord among nations. Usually you go to these sites to pay your respects. And also to perhaps air your views about the root causes of such incidents. I think that when I do that, I will be paying, as I said earlier, my respect to the American nation.
PELLEY: But the American people, sir, believe that your country is a terrorist nation, exporting terrorism in the world. You must have known that visiting the World Trade Center site would infuriate many Americans, as if to be mocking the American people.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I'm amazed. How can you speak for the whole of the American nation?
PELLEY: Well, the American nation . . .
AHMADINEJAD: . . . you are representing a media and you're a reporter. The American nation is made up of 300 million people. There are different points of view over there. I would like to think that the points of view of the American people is very close to the points of view of the Iranian people. The American people are very much against and opposed to what certain American officials are saying and their points of view. And also the way that the people have voted in the American elections is very telling. And we are criticizing such behavior on the part of the American government. We believe that if anyone just allows himself to accuse others, there will be no possibility for peace and friendship.
PELLEY: What do you mean the American election is telling? What did you take from it?
AHMADINEJAD: What I'm saying is that the American people very clearly have shown that they do not endorse what certain American officials are saying and doing. I remind you of the rallies in Washington a couple of days ago. What were they saying and shouting? Perhaps 70, 80 percent of the American people are against their troops, their sons and daughters being in Iraq and war. And as I said, they're very much against war. And for that matter, the American people are peace-loving people. You shouldn't think that what the American officials are doing and their behavior reflects completely the mood of the American people. And American officials must not make the American people a victim of their wants and wishes. And we make a distinction between the American people and American officials. And the American people are opposed to occupation, the use of force, and also terrorism, the killing of the people of other nations. And this is what we are saying. This is what we believe in. With that in mind, we feel very close to the American people. And I'm sure that this is reciprocal. A couple of days ago, an American scientist, a scholar, wrote to me saying that he has a great love for Iran. And once he passes, he wants to be buried in this country. The two nations are very close to one another.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you say that the two nations are very close to one another, but it is an established fact now that Iranian bombs and Iranian know-how are killing Americans in Iraq. You have American blood on your hands. Why?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, this is what the American officials are saying. Again, American officials wherever around the world that they encounter a problem which they fail to resolve, instead of accepting that, they prefer to accuse others. We basically are very much opposed to any kind of insecurity inside Iraq. Because once we have insecurity in Iraq, the first party that will be affected would be Iran. Having said that, we fully oppose occupation and also military attacks. In Iraq we don't need to do that. For that matter, in any part of the world we don't need to do that. When it comes to war, we don't think that war, belligerence, is a good solution for differences of opinion. We have said in the past to American officials that the Iraqi people very much oppose occupation. And they will not accept this. And experience tells you this. This is a nation with many thousands of years of history. They have stood up to occupiers in the past, and they will stand up again. I'm very sorry that, because of the wrong decisions taken by American officials, Iraqi people are being killed and also American soldiers. It's very regrettable. And, again, I'm saying that why should they be killed? Why should these boys and girls be killed? Why should we have war in Iraq and insecurity? I believe that the people behind the insecurity are those who, from thousands of kilometers away, have brought in troops. First, they said that they want to topple the dictator and find WMDs [weapons of mass destruction]. They didn't find WMDs and there's no dictator there anymore. So the question is: What are American troops doing right now in Iraq? They have to answer, respond to these questions. We are not interfering in Iraq. The Iraqi people are our friends. And the president, the prime minister, the speaker of the parliament are our friends. We don't need to interfere in Iraq. We are two nations which have been connected through history. Each year millions of Iranians go to Iraq for pilgrimage. And in a number of these bombings inside Iraq, Iranian citizens have been killed. We want peace; we want security in Iraq; and it only serves our own interests. And those American officials who see the interest in a continued occupation of Iraq, I ask them to reconsider. They should leave alone the Iraqi nation and also their own soldiers. And they shouldn't accuse others needlessly. We basically oppose the killing of any person, innocent persons, from any race or community. As I said, the Iraqi people have been victimized. We feel very sad for them. Equally, we feel sad for American soldiers and troops because they don't know why they're there. They are the victims of the, if you will, the wants and wishes of certain American officials.
PELLEY: Mr. President, American men and women are being killed by your weapons in Iraq. You know this.
AHMADINEJAD: No, no, no.
PELLEY: Why are those weapons there?
AHMADINEJAD: Who's saying that?
PELLEY: The American Army has captured Iranian missiles in Iraq. The critical elements of the explosively formed penetrator bombs that are killing so many people are coming from Iran. There's no doubt about that anymore. The denials are no longer credible, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Very good. If I may: Are you an American politician? Am I to look at you as an American politician or a reporter? This is what the American officials are claiming. Well, we don't need to arrest many people to prove that Americans are occupying Iraq or produce fabricated documents. If you go to the streets of Baghdad, you will see American helicopters and tanks and Humvees, so on and so forth. So the Iraqi people are just defending themselves. I think the way out for the American official from this problem that it has created for itself shouldn't be in accusing Iran. You need to understand the realities of the region and also respect the Iraqi people. The Iraqi people, like other people, want to have security, want to have peace, want to be free. When they see that soldiers come into their houses, they react. So if the American government does accept this reality, this truth, everything will changes. If they accuse us 1,000 times, the truth will not change. They need to accept the truth and also the wishes of the Iraqi people. That is a way out of this deadlock.
PELLEY: Mr. President, I want to be very direct and very clear. Many Americans believe that you have American blood on your hands. Are you saying that it is not the policy of this government to send weapons into Iraq? Sir, forgive me, you're smiling, but this is a very serious matter to America.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, it's serious for us as well. I daresay it's serious for everyone. I'm just amazed as the representative of the media, why do you insist on the untrue accusations leveled by your government? This doesn't solve anything. It seems to me it's laughable for someone to turn a blind eye to the truth and accuse others. It doesn't help. And the reason that I'm smiling, again, it's because that the picture is so clear. But American officials refuse to see it. And I think that as a member of the media, your responsibility here is to talk about the truth and back home to force your officials to appreciate the truth and take the correct decision. The problem in Iraq doesn't have anything to do with the Iraqi people. For that matter the killing of American troops doesn't have anything to do with the Iraqi people. And as we have security, things will be better. And we don't want to see a single soldier killed. The solutions we are putting on the table are very humane. And, again, we are asking for very basic things from the American officials, to respect the wishes of the Iraqi people and also their rights. A dictator has been toppled and WMDs have not been found. If they persist on the same course for 50 years and arrest diplomats, so on and so forth, this will not help with the situation. And if you repeat the mistakes of the past, nothing will get resolved.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you must have rejoiced more than anyone when Saddam Hussein fell. You owe President Bush. This is one of the best things that's ever happened to your country.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I have said this in another interview. Once the dictator was toppled, many people were happy. But the American government did not appropriately use this golden opportunity. Again, this happened sometime ago and it pleased the Iraqi people. They could have used this much better. They should have left the Iraqi people to go their own way and to determine their own fate and to live like other nations in this part of the world. Well, initially, we might have had the impression that American officials want to redeem themselves and the mistakes they have made in the past. Because for eight years they supported Saddam against my nation. Many hundreds of thousands of people were killed. Thousands of people were chemically bombarded. Many people were killed in their own houses. This very city of Tehran was the target of more than 100 missiles. Many people were killed in Tehran. But Saddam was being supported by American officials. So once American officials announced that they were going to deal with Saddam, our first impression was that they're going to make amends for their past behavior. We have every hope and we were happy. But once Saddam went away, they didn't find any weapons, American officials later announced that we are here to stay in Iraq. So there was a question: Why do you want to be there? Why do you want to stay behind? Do you think that the Iraqi people cannot take care of themselves? They can determine their own fate. I think that their first and biggest mistake was to remain in Iraq. If they had left Iraq, that would have helped with positive interaction between the American government and the peoples of the region. But they stayed behind and they appointed an American administrator and they tried to influence the elections and also the future government in Iraq, and later they tried to sow the seeds of discord and also give a free hand to terrorist groups to come inside Iraq. So once a country is occupied, its security is the responsibility of the occupation. However, they have to answer for all of these. Many thousands of American soldiers have been killed. They need to answer for their action. Instead of answering these questions, they are accusing others. So initially we welcomed the developments, but once it continued, this is very regrettable.
PELLEY: Mr. President, can you tell me that you are not sending weapons to Iraq? Very simple. Very directly.
AHMADINEJAD: We don't need to do that. We are very much opposed to war and insecurity in Iraq.
PELLEY: Is that "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: It's very clear, the situation. The insecurity in Iraq is detrimental to our interests. We have more than 1,000 kilometers of common borders with Iraq. Each year, many millions of Iranians go to Iraq and millions of Iraqis come to Iran. So we are very unhappy with the insecurity. We are doing our very best to help with security. For security, we decided to sit down and talk with Americans in Iraq.
PELLEY: As a goodwill gesture, will you say right now in this interview that you will do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, Iranian forces are not inside Iraq. Can you show me one?
PELLEY: No sir, Iranian arms, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Please, allow me to continue. Please, allow me to finish my thought. The American government has admitted that with more than 160,000 troops, state-of-the-art military equipment, they have failed to control and put a stop to the activities of these few people. That's very unfortunate. You shouldn't accuse others because you have certain problems yourself. Very clearly, we are friends to all. We very much are saddened with war. We are very much saddened that American troops are being killed, losing their lives over there. So you don't know the people of the region. I think that the British government was smarter. They left the city of Basra, pulled out their forces. And once the British soldiers left the city, the local people celebrated. And today, unfortunately, you're opposing the Iraqi people. You could have stood side by side with the Iraqi people. Again, whenever you correct your policies, it helps everyone. It benefits you. It benefits Iraq. It benefits all the peoples of the region. We're using everything in our power to provide security in Iraq. We have said so on many occasions. Whoever is killed in Iraq, that would sadden us.
PELLEY: Mr. President, we appreciate your thoughts. Some people watching this interview, frankly, will think that you're dodging the questions because many of the questions that I ask you are fairly straightforward "yes" or "no" questions. And let me try this one again, if I may. Will you pledge tonight to do everything in your power to prevent Iranian arms from entering Iraq? Can you make that pledge?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, I think you have been charged with a mission to repeat a sentence over and over again. My comments are very clear. I think that you should go back and take American officials to task. Use the same force you're using right now so that they take the troops out.
PELLEY: Was that a "yes" or a "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: If you are to take sides, well, I don't know. Well, you shouldn't tell me what kind of answer I should give to you. You're free to ask me questions. I didn't put any limitations on your questions.
PELLEY: True.
AHMADINEJAD: I'm free to give my own answers. I think that all of us should go to American officials and ask them: "What are you looking for in Iraq? Let's be clear. Why have you stayed behind? Why are you accusing others? And your policies have created insecurity. You are behind terrorism. So once you correct your ways, these things will take care of themselves. Why are you using a road that goes to nowhere? Use the correct road. We support the rights of all nations. We love all nations. And the message of the Iranian people is friendship with all. In our history, we have never attacked another country, occupied another country. This is a peace-loving nation. And you should remember that we are living within our borders. And people who have brought troops from thousands of miles away, they are the ones who should be held accountable and responsible.
PELLEY: Mr. President, you say you love all nations. I have to assume that includes the Nation of Israel.
AHMADINEJAD: Israel is not a nation. Well, we like the people, yes, because they are victims as well. They used to live in their own countries, in their own cities. They were given empty promises, false promises. They said that we are going to give you jobs, we are going to give you security. And they pushed the local Palestinian people out and made them refugees and also made refugees of another community. In other words, from thousands of miles away, people have been emigrating to this country and they are living in fear every day. And we feel for them. Last year in my speech I said that the Zionist entity should open the borders and the gates. Let the people decide where they want to go and settle. They are good people as well. We have no bones to pick with them. We are against terrorism. We are against wrong policies. We are friends with all people, Jewish people, Christians, different people of different faiths. We are, well, we're in contact with them. Here in Iran there are Jewish communities; there are Christian communities; we're all friends. Also, non-Muslim countries, we help them when a natural calamity breaks. We love all people. We are opposed to Zionism, occupation, terrorism, dropping bombs on people when they are inside their own homes, killing men, women, and children. Very openly I have said time and again that I oppose these.
PELLEY: If the Palestinians reach an agreement with Israel for a two-state solution, will you then recognize Israel as well?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, the decision rests with the Palestinian people. This is exactly what I'm saying.
PELLEY: What would you do, sir?
AHMADINEJAD: What we are saying, our solution for Palestine is a humane one. We are saying that you should allow the Palestinian people to participate in a fair and free election and determine their own fate. Whatever decision they take, everyone should go with that.
PELLEY: And if that decision . . .
AHMADINEJAD: No other party must interfere. We are not telling the Palestinian people what decisions they should take. Let them make their own decision. Whatever decision they take, we will go for that.
PELLEY: And if that decision is a two-state solution, you're good with that? You could support a two-state solution?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, why are you prejudging what will happen? Let's pave the ground first for a free and fair choice. And once they make their choice, we must respect that. All the Palestinian people must be given this opportunity, allow them to make their own decisions. Let us not tell them what course of action they need to take.
PELLEY: You have said in the past that you have 3,000 centrifuges in a line producing highly-enriched uranium. Do you have more now?
MAHMOUD AHMADINEJAD: No. Our plan and program is very transparent. We are under the supervision of the agency. Everything is on the table. We have nothing to hide.
PELLEY: Transparent? Sir, it's been hidden for more than 15 years. You've been operating a secret nuclear program. It's nothing if it's not secret.
AHMADINEJAD: Who is saying that?
PELLEY: Well, the IAEA. You've, in fact, agreed with the IAEA to confess what you've done in secret over the past years. It is not transparent, sir.
AHMADINEJAD: Very good. I think that you are not familiar with the structure and the laws and the regulations of the agency. The agency is supposed to do two things. One, supervision. The other, support for the member states. The agency is supposed to supervise and ask questions and we respond. Interestingly enough, in all agency reports, you will read that there are no signs of diversion on the part of the Iranian people. In no reports. But naturally, the agency has questions to ask. And when it comes to that, interestingly enough, compared to European countries and other countries, the questions they ask us are far fewer. They have scores of questions to ask other countries. But the U.S. and a number of other countries are politicizing matters. They don't want us to progress, to develop. So maybe it would be best if you ask the agency how many questions they have asked the U.S. and European countries for that matter. Scores of questions. Because they are producing bombs, new generations of nuclear bombs, they are fabricating those. And our activities are very peaceful under the supervision of the agency. We have provided the largest amount of cooperation to the agency. And what we are doing is very transparent.
PELLEY: For the sake of clarity, because there is so much concern in the world about this next question, please give me the most direct answer you can. Is it your goal to build a nuclear bomb?
AHMADINEJAD: What are you driving at?
PELLEY: Simply that, sir. Is it the goal of your government, the goal of this nation to build a nuclear weapon?
AHMADINEJAD: Do you think that the nuclear technology is only limited in a bomb? You can only build a bomb with that?
PELLEY: No, I appreciate the differences, sir, but the question is limited to the bomb.
AHMADINEJAD: It has different uses. Well, you have to appreciate we don't need a nuclear bomb. We don't need that. What needs do we have for a bomb?
PELLEY: May I take that as a "no," sir?
AHMADINEJAD: Please, let me finish my thought. It is a firm "no." I'm going to be much firmer now. I want to address all politicians around the world, statesmen. Any party who uses national revenues to make a bomb, a nuclear bomb, will make a mistake. Because in political relations right now, the nuclear bomb is of no use. If it was useful, it would have prevented the downfall of the Soviet Union. If it was useful, it would have resolved the problems the Americans have in Iraq. The U.S. has tested new generations of bombs, many thousands of warheads you have in your arsenals. It's of no use. And also the Zionist entity, they have hundreds of warheads. It's not going to help them. The time of the bomb is past. The parties who think that by using the bomb you can control others, they are wrong. Today we are living in the era of intellectual pursuits. You should spend your money on your people. We don't need the bomb. For 28 years we have defended ourselves in the face of enemy onslaught. Every day we are becoming more powerful. And, again, we don't need such weapons. In fact, we think that this is inhuman. So can you please tell me why the U.S. government is fabricating these bombs? Do you want to provide more welfare, happiness to the people through the bomb? Are you going to deal with global poverty? Or do you want to kill people? So our belief, sir, tell us and also our culture, because of these, we are very much opposed to the killing of people. This is very clear.
PELLEY: At the moment, our two countries may very well be walking down the road to war. How do you convince President Bush, how do you convince other nations in the West . . . .
AHMADINEJAD: What two parties are walking towards war?
PELLEY: Iran, the United States, Western countries. France this week . . . .
AHMADINEJAD: Who says that?
PELLEY: France this week said that war might be indicated. How do you convince these Western powers that you are not pursuing a bomb?
AHMADEINEJAD: You haven't read the latest news, I have to say. It's wrong to think that Iran and the U.S. are walking towards war. Who says so? Why should we go to war? What reasons are there for the two countries to go to war? We have a logic which we have announced for some time now. We very much oppose the behavior of the U.S. administration. We think it's wrong. And we are saying what we feel, and you are free to say what you feel. And people have a right to choose. Why should we go to war over that? If having said that is a part of a psychological warfare plot, the American people are well familiar with these plots. You shouldn't make the American people afraid needlessly. There's no war in the offing. And also I think that certain American officials do not want friendly relations between the two countries and the citizens of the two countries to visit each other. Last year we requested for a direct flight between the two countries because we want to promote trade, promote cultural activities, and also people-to-people contact. But the American government opposed that. There is no war in the offing. Again, this is psychological warfare. If you have differences of opinions, you can use logic to resolve your differences.
PELLEY: You can show the world today that you are not pursuing a bomb. All you have to do is give the order. Open your nuclear facilities. Let the United Nations inspectors in there today and prove that there is no bomb program. Why not take that course?
AHMADEINEJAD: I think that you are a little bit behind the day's news. You might have been away on an assignment. I don't know.
PELLEY: I'm familiar with the day's news.
AHMADEINEJAD: The reports say that we have been complying. And they are inspecting all of our sites every day. What more am I supposed to do? So, I try to be as frank as possible, but . . . .
PELLEY: You're opening the sites slowly over time, sir. People say that you're just trying to gather as much highly-enriched uranium as you possibly can.
AHMADEINEJAD: No. No. No. Well, should you say this, make these accusations or agency inspectors? Inspectors have said that Iran has not diverted; there's no diversion here, in other words. Again, let me repeat. We have not diverted from a peaceful path. This is what the agencies think. There is a solution here, however, a very simple solution. The countries that have atomic bombs should destroy their stockpiles. And that would make everyone happy. You shouldn't accuse others needlessly, and you shouldn't lose your temper and make life miserable for others as well. They have made mistakes and have diverted themselves. They think that others will do the same. There are many countries which have the technology. Five or six have diverted from the peaceful path, road, rather. So those five or six should return to the correct path. If certain parties think that they have rights which go beyond the normal rights that any nation should have, that will be problematic. I think that the American government should appreciate that it is like any other member of the international community, respect the views of the agency. It's very regrettable to see that certain U.S. officials have insulted the very clear positions taken by the agency, and they have lost their temper. And also they have made threats. They have attacked the director general of the agency. That is shameful. If you think that the agency is a reputable one, you should allow it to go ahead with its business. Why should you, or the agency, for that matter, repeat the words of the secretary of state? Rather, what they need to do is report the facts, the truth. So the problems of the American politicians is because they are interested in their own interests. And they want the rest of the world just to say "yes, sir" and go along with whatever they say. That is finished. It's in the past.
PELLEY: What trait do you admire in President Bush?
AHMADINEJAD: Again, I have a very frank tone. I think that President Bush needs to correct his ways.
PELLEY: What do you admire about him?
AHMADEINEJAD: He should respect the American people.
PELLEY: Is there anything? Any trait?
AHMADINEJAD: As an American citizen, tell me what trait do you admire?
PELLEY: Well, Mr. Bush is, without question, a very religious man, for example, as you are. I wonder if there's anything that you've seen in President Bush that you admire.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, is Mr. Bush a religious man?
PELLEY: Very much so. As you are.
AHMADEINEJAD: What religion, please tell me, tells you as a follower of that religion to occupy another country and kill its people? Please tell me. Does Christianity tell its followers to do that? Judaism, for that matter? Islam, for that matter? What prophet tells you to send 160,000 troops to another country, kill men, women, and children? You just can't wear your religion on your sleeve or just go to church. You should be truthfully religious. Religion tells us all that you should respect the property, the life of different people. Respect human rights. Love your fellow man. And once you hear that a person has been killed, you should be saddened. You shouldn't sit in a room, a dark room, and hatch plots. And because of your plots, many thousands of people are killed. Having said that, we respect the American people. And because of our respect for the American people, we respectfully talk with President Bush. We have a respectful tone. But having said that, I don't think that that is a good definition of religion. Religion is love for your fellow man, brotherhood, telling the truth.
PELLEY: I take it you can't think of anything you like about President Bush.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, I'm not familiar with the gentleman's private life. Maybe in his private life he is very kind or a determined man. I'm not aware of that. I base my judgment on what I see in his public life. Having said that, I think that President Bush can behave much better. There were golden opportunities for President Bush. He should have used them better.
PELLEY: I asked President Bush what he would say to you if he were sitting in this chair. And he told me, quote, speaking to you, that you've made terrible choices for your people. You've isolated your nation. You've taken a nation of proud and honorable people and made your country the pariah of the world. These are President Bush's words to you. What's your reply to the president?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, President Bush is free to think as he pleases and to say what he pleases. I don't oppose freedom of speech. I believe in freedom of speech. President Bush is free to say what he pleases. But these would not change the truth. So that President Bush knows the Iranian people are dearly loved today. We can very well put this to the test to find out who has become isolated. Again, maybe one of my friends could go to another country and a friend of President Bush could go to the same country, find out which one of us is isolated. You're free to choose any country you like. I don't think that President Bush has said these things. Rather, I prefer to think that this is your impression of what the president has said.
PELLEY: I'm quoting the president directly for the record.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is a direct quote? So, well, this tells me that there's a great divide between us.
PELLEY: Why does your government confiscate your people's satellite dishes? What is it that you don't want your people to see?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, it's not prohibited like that. After everything is said and done, this is a law passed by the Iranian parliament. And the members of the parliament have been chosen by the people. Having said that, the Iranian people are, by and large, using satellite television. You can go out on the streets and see this for yourself.
PELLEY: But as you well know, they are confiscated from time to time in sweeps in the country. And I wonder what it is that you don't want your people to see.
AHMADINEJAD: Well, again, this is the law. Our people are free and express their opinion about all matters internationally. They are well aware of international news. Having said that, I like to think that the Iranian people is one of the most well-informed nations. You can go to the street and ask the people yourself. Reporters from other countries go to different Iranian cities, they're free to move about and ask questions. But Iranian reporters cannot do the same in the U.S. You can very easily come and see me and just ask me questions, but our reporters cannot ask questions from American officials. Our interview today is going to be aired byIranian TV. I very much hope that Iranian reporters will be given a possibility to ask questions from American officials. Then the truth will be uncovered.
PELLEY: You know, I'm curious. Looking back over the years, do you believe today that taking the American hostages in 1979 was a mistake?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, you have to deal with different things in their own time. If you go back in time, things will go wrong. If you go back 500 years, what happened in Europe and the U.S. for that matter. You shouldn't look back at what happened in the past. Have your sights towards the future. This wouldn't help with anything. Because if you are to do that, we have to go over the dossier of the activities of various American administrations in this country from 1958 onwards. That wouldn't be a pretty picture. I don't want to talk about and think about the dark passages of our history. Let's have our sights towards the future.
PELLEY: Mr. President, I just have a few questions. We have appreciated your answers very much, and I know we're pressing on time here. We would be very grateful if you wouldn't mind taking just a few more. Will you, in this interview tonight, rule out the possibility of a nuclear test of an Iranian weapon during your presidency?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, we don't have any plans.
PELLEY: But rule it out. Say that "we will not test a nuclear device as long as I am president." Can you say that?
AHMADINEJAD: Actually, I very much oppose this behavior. Picture it. If an Iranian reporter kept repeatedly asking the same questions from a U.S. official, how would you feel? Would you feel good about that?
PELLEY: I would.
AHMADINEJAD: I think that instead of going astray here and misleading the public, we should try to help with the uncovering of the truth. You are a member of the media. You are not a government official. You should be concerned with the truth. We should all be concerned with the truth. We don't need such weapons. Those who don't have anything to say to other nations and deal with them, they resort to atomic weapons. We are a cultured people and we have good relations with all nations. And the status of a country has nothing to do with atomic weapons, rather its culture and its civilization. And whenever we make a decision, we are courageous enough to come out and say that we have made such a decision. Whatever we want to do, we have nothing to hide. We clearly will announce that. Well, I said sometime ago that if you sanction us, we are going to take the production to an industrial scale, and we did that. And we said that we will continue to push ahead undaunted. We did that. We have no problems. When it comes to that, we are very transparent and we have a frank tone of voice. Let me be frank and very straightforward here. I oppose the unilateral policies and bullying policies of the American administration. I believe that these lead to war, lead to greater poverty and killing. I believe that you can manage the war better through friendship, mutual respect, and by respecting laws and also fair play. Again, I'm being very frank here. I oppose the very idea of the bomb. I have nothing to hide. Also, I oppose the policies of the American administration.
PELLEY: If the United Nations Security Council or the European Union votes in favor of additional sanctions against your country, what will you do?
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, they are just trapping themselves. They can become trapped themselves. Because any person or party who insists on a wrong decision, that will be problematic for him, no other person. For 28 years now we have been under political pressure and economic sanctions. What happened? Nothing. And the Iranian people have managed to push ahead with technology. Our economy is growing each day. And, of course, having said that, I think that that course of action is highly unlikely. There are wise people in different countries which will not go ahead with this. Iran is a member of the agency. We're under the supervision of the agency. The agency's reports are very transparent. We have provided the fullest amount of cooperation to the agency. If a party wants to go beyond the law, this will be to their own detriment. I have said time and again you can do nothing to this country. This is a great country. We have extensive God-given riches and resources. From a political point of view, we are strong and powerful. And under any conditions, we will manage to push ahead. But they need to appreciate that having said that, I don't think that such a thing is possible. Again, a number of American officials want this to happen. But you shouldn't worry about that. Just say that this is not going to happen.
PELLEY: If sanctions do occur, if another round of sanctions occur, you will continue to enrich uranium behind closed doors, I take it.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is not going to happen. I have talked extensively about this. Nobody is able to impose an unlawful course of action on the Iranian people. The Iranian people will not abide by that, accept that. And it will not serve their interests to do that. Both the American government and other countries, it helps them if they are friends with Iran. As a friend, I need to tell you to take this route. Again, you're free to take any route you want. And you will have to go with the repercussions. So these past few years, what has it gotten you? And the conditions will not change to benefit them; I assure you of that.
PELLEY: Would an attack on your nuclear sites, in your opinion, give you leave to attack U.S. forces in the region or the U.S. mainland?
AHMADEINEJAD: Who is going to attack this country?
PELLEY: President Bush has pledged that you will not be allowed to possess a nuclear weapon and will use military force if necessary.
AHMADEINEJAD: I think Mr. Bush, if he wants his party to win the next election, there are cheaper ways to go about this. I can very well give him a few ideas so that the people vote for him. He should respect the American people. They should not bug the telephone conversations of their citizens. They should not kill the sons and daughters of the American nation. They should not squander the taxpayers' money and give them to weapons companies. And also help the people, the victims of Katrina. People will vote for them if they do these things. But if they insist on what they are saying right now, this will not help them. Again, nobody can hurt the Iranian people. And history tells us that the people who have been less than kind to the Iranian people, they have lost out. What I'm saying, I am being very sincere here. I'm a Muslim. I cannot tell a lie. I am supposed to tell the truth. What I'm saying is that President Bush's conduct in Iraq is wrong. And his wrong conduct is behind his party losing the previous elections. This is very clear. The American people are very much dismayed with the behavior and the conduct of the present administration. They are not dismayed with Iran. In fact, the two nations are very close to one another. An example of that would be the letter sent to me by an American scholar a few days ago.
PELLEY: You mentioned telling the truth as a Muslim, and as you know so much better than I do, Verse 42 of the second sura: "The truth shall not be obscured by falsehood, and those who know the truth must tell it." But when I ask you a question as direct as "Will you pledge not to test a nuclear weapon?" you dance all around the question. You never say "yes." You never say "no."
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, thank you for that. You are like a CIA investigator. And you are . . .
PELLEY: I am just a reporter. I am a simple, average American reporter.
AHMADEINEJAD: This is not a Baghdad prison. Please, this is not a secret prison in Europe. This is not Abu Ghraib. This is Iran. I'm the president of this country. Well, I think that I've gone beyond what you've asked me, above and beyond. And I think that if you speak to your job as a reporter, what I have said so far, again, goes above and beyond what you ask me.
PELLEY: One last thing. So important for the American people to understand. When your airplane approaches Manhattan this week, you will look out the window and you will see that the World Trade Center is gone. Many Americans, Mr. President, to be frank, believe that you look out that window and you say to yourself, "Good. Somebody got 'em." They believe our countries are enemies.
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, you shouldn't speak on behalf of the American people. I can speak on behalf of the Iranian people, but you cannot speak on behalf of the American people. Why do you insist on doing that? Why do you not allow the American people to speak for themselves? Why? Let them speak for themselves. The people gathered around the White House a couple of days ago. They spoke whatever was in their hearts and minds. Are they not American citizens? Hundreds of thousands of people have rallied against the war. Are they not citizens? Our government at the time expressed its condemnation. We issued an official communiqué condemning that incident. How can you, in your mind, accuse and condemn others? Well, if an Iranian person for that matter had done the same thing, it would have been shameful, and it would not have been fair. So, again, this is not fair. Maybe this is your point of view or also perhaps your editor's point of view. And you are saying that the American people are saying these things. The American people still don't know who was behind the bombing of the Twin Towers. Many books in the U.S. have been written about the incident., and there are questions circling in your society. Once you go back, go to the streets, ask the local people who was behind this, what were the reason for that? And, again, I fail to see why you continually say “the American people.“ I have the latest surveys. Eighty percent of the American citizens say that the American government knew about the attack beforehand. They had information.
PELLEY: You don't believe that, sir.
AHMADEINEJAD: I'm not making a judgment here, mind you. I'm not being judgmental. That's not important for me. What is important for me is to find out why this happened. We can take a course of action which ensures this never happens. Why should we manage the world like this? It's very possible for us all to be friends, for the world to be in peace, and for the family of man to love one another and to not hate one another. So who propagates these ideas, I ask you. We should all be friends. We should deal fairly with one another, respect one another. Nations do not have any problems when it comes to interacting with one another. Unethical politicians make war. Nations don't make war. We're saying that you should allow our nations to be friends with one another. We condemned that incident right there and then. Why should many innocent people be killed? For what reason? Well, behind this building there is another building, a building which in 1981, some 25 years ago, the Iranian president and the prime minister in the office, they were blown up by terrorists, a bomb planted by terrorists. And the president and the prime minister burned in that bomb, by that bomb. And, again, this is very regrettable that those terrorists, which were behind that bombing and other assassinations in this country, can freely have access to American officials abd are being protected by the American Army in Iraq. So this country is a victim of terrorism throughout its history. So you cannot produce even one document, a single document, about terrorist action on the part of the Iranian government or Iranian officials. We are very clear in our position. We say that we spiritually support the right of the Palestinian people and also independence for Iraq. We have nothing to hide. We are very much opposed to the Iraqi occupation. Again, we have nothing to hide. It's very regrettable that many thousands of people were killed in the Twin Towers incident. We have announced time and again. And what we are asking is can we do something that ensures this never happens? And the answer is "yes." We can do that, providing a number of parties do not establish terrorist organizations and set them off on nations. We know who is behind terrorist organizations. You know full well who is behind a number of terrorist organizations around my part of the world, that is. Who provided them with logistical support, political support? It's a very well-known fact they have made and created these terrorist organizations themselves.
PELLEY: Who, sir?
AHMADINEJAD: It's very clear. Very clear.
PELLEY: Make it clearer. Name the names.
AHMADEINEJAD: I don't want to name names. But the terrorist organizations in Afghanistan, who is behind them? And what intelligence organization belonging to what country is behind them? This is very clear.
PELLEY: Shall I say CIA and the United States? Will that . . .
AHMADEINEJAD: Well, maybe you know something that . . . The relations and the developments in this part of the world are somewhat clear. I don't want to say something which would agitate and fan the flames of the situation. What I'm saying is that this is shameful. My country is a great victim of terrorism. We very much oppose terrorism. As I said, we oppose terrorism. Why? Why should innocent people be killed? For what reason? We are saying that each and every person should be respected regardless of their color, creed, what country they come from, what language they speak. We're all fellow human beings. We should be respected. Why some parties ask more than their fair share? Why do they insult nations? They shouldn't do that. This is not right. Who created secret prisons in Europe? You don't know that? Did Iran establish those prisons? This one is very clear and the documents have been revealed. Why are they creating secret prisons? If the law provides the possibility to establish these prisons, go ahead. Why this skullduggery? So this is, again, very clear.
PELLEY: Would you reestablish diplomatic relations with the United States? Is that something you want? Something you would do right away?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, our foreign policy is a policy which says that we should have relations with all countries and nations. Before the revolution, this country was much damaged by American policy. Our late imam said that we will not have relations with two countries: one, the apartheid regime of South Africa; the other, the Zionist regime. We like to have relations with all countries. The American administration cut off relations themselves unilaterally. The Carter administration perhaps were thinking that this would be to their benefit. But this didn't happen. We would like to have relations with all countries based on mutual respect. This is the very basis of our foreign policy. I think that we are done.
PELLEY: You have been generous with your time, Mr. President. Thank you for your time very much.
AHMADEINEJAD: Good luck.
Source
November 29, 2006
Message to the American People
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful
O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers.
Noble Americans!
Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic consequences of US interference in other countries; Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities; And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect freedom and human dignity and integrity;
Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with you.
While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and the United States closer together.
Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.
Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies.
We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need.
We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings.
We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.
The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United States testify to the veracity of these statements.
Noble Americans!
Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other nations of the world.
Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary restrictions of US authorities.
As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.
We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad daylight, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.
No day goes by without a new crime.
Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment, wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't? For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still hoping to return to their homeland.
You know well that the US administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from condemning it.
Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the US administration?
Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the Palestinian people.
Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception.
Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted and has even been aggravated.
In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers, separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the command of the current US administration. A substantial number of them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has tarnished the image of the American people and government.
Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.
I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure.
Noble Americans!
You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.
You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them through its proclaimed "war on terror." But everyone knows that such behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image and its credibility among nations.
The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped, suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or even shot to death.
I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this behavior and indeed deplore it.
The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this message.
The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircraft, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices.
Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.
My questions are the following:
Is there not a better approach to governance?
Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace, stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations, instead of aggression and war?
We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.
But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents? If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved? The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.
What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the interests of the American people and of the other nations of the world.
What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?
I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit everyone.
Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness.
I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in the US:
The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the American people nor by other nations.
Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you will also be held to account by the people and by history.
If the US Government meets the current domestic and external challenges with an approach based on truth and justice, it can remedy some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier this year.
To sum up:
It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice.
It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, honesty and compassion.
It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension, threats, imposition or war.
It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.
Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine religions, will overcome every difficulty.
What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.
I am confident that you, the American people, will play an instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love, compassion and fraternity.
The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us, injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open and unimpeded.
We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:
"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation. Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)
I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.
Source
O, Almighty God, bestow upon humanity the perfect human being promised to all by You, and make us among his followers.
Noble Americans!
Were we not faced with the activities of the US administration in this part of the world and the negative ramifications of those activities on the daily lives of our peoples, coupled with the many wars and calamities caused by the US administration as well as the tragic consequences of US interference in other countries; Were the American people not God-fearing, truth-loving, and justice-seeking, while the US administration actively conceals the truth and impedes any objective portrayal of current realities; And if we did not share a common responsibility to promote and protect freedom and human dignity and integrity;
Then, there would have been little urgency to have a dialogue with you.
While Divine providence has placed Iran and the United States geographically far apart, we should be cognizant that human values and our common human spirit, which proclaim the dignity and exalted worth of all human beings, have brought our two great nations of Iran and the United States closer together.
Both our nations are God-fearing, truth-loving and justice-seeking, and both seek dignity, respect and perfection.
Both greatly value and readily embrace the promotion of human ideals such as compassion, empathy, respect for the rights of human beings, securing justice and equity, and defending the innocent and the weak against oppressors and bullies.
We are all inclined towards the good, and towards extending a helping hand to one another, particularly to those in need.
We all deplore injustice, the trampling of peoples' rights and the intimidation and humiliation of human beings.
We all detest darkness, deceit, lies and distortion, and seek and admire salvation, enlightenment, sincerity and honesty.
The pure human essence of the two great nations of Iran and the United States testify to the veracity of these statements.
Noble Americans!
Our nation has always extended its hand of friendship to all other nations of the world.
Hundreds of thousands of my Iranian compatriots are living amongst you in friendship and peace, and are contributing positively to your society. Our people have been in contact with you over the past many years and have maintained these contacts despite the unnecessary restrictions of US authorities.
As mentioned, we have common concerns, face similar challenges, and are pained by the sufferings and afflictions in the world.
We, like you, are aggrieved by the ever-worsening pain and misery of the Palestinian people. Persistent aggressions by the Zionists are making life more and more difficult for the rightful owners of the land of Palestine. In broad daylight, in front of cameras and before the eyes of the world, they are bombarding innocent defenseless civilians, bulldozing houses, firing machine guns at students in the streets and alleys, and subjecting their families to endless grief.
No day goes by without a new crime.
Palestinian mothers, just like Iranian and American mothers, love their children, and are painfully bereaved by the imprisonment, wounding and murder of their children. What mother wouldn't? For 60 years, the Zionist regime has driven millions of the inhabitants of Palestine out of their homes. Many of these refugees have died in the Diaspora and in refugee camps. Their children have spent their youth in these camps and are aging while still hoping to return to their homeland.
You know well that the US administration has persistently provided blind and blanket support to the Zionist regime, has emboldened it to continue its crimes, and has prevented the UN Security Council from condemning it.
Who can deny such broken promises and grave injustices towards humanity by the US administration?
Governments are there to serve their own people. No people wants to side with or support any oppressors. But regrettably, the US administration disregards even its own public opinion and remains in the forefront of supporting the trampling of the rights of the Palestinian people.
Let's take a look at Iraq. Since the commencement of the US military presence in Iraq, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed, maimed or displaced. Terrorism in Iraq has grown exponentially. With the presence of the US military in Iraq, nothing has been done to rebuild the ruins, to restore the infrastructure or to alleviate poverty. The US Government used the pretext of the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, but later it became clear that that was just a lie and a deception.
Although Saddam was overthrown and people are happy about his departure, the pain and suffering of the Iraqi people has persisted and has even been aggravated.
In Iraq, about one hundred and fifty thousand American soldiers, separated from their families and loved ones, are operating under the command of the current US administration. A substantial number of them have been killed or wounded and their presence in Iraq has tarnished the image of the American people and government.
Their mothers and relatives have, on numerous occasions, displayed their discontent with the presence of their sons and daughters in a land thousands of miles away from US shores. American soldiers often wonder why they have been sent to Iraq.
I consider it extremely unlikely that you, the American people, consent to the billions of dollars of annual expenditure from your treasury for this military misadventure.
Noble Americans!
You have heard that the US administration is kidnapping its presumed opponents from across the globe and arbitrarily holding them without trial or any international supervision in horrendous prisons that it has established in various parts of the world. God knows who these detainees actually are, and what terrible fate awaits them.
You have certainly heard the sad stories of the Guantanamo and Abu-Ghraib prisons. The US administration attempts to justify them through its proclaimed "war on terror." But everyone knows that such behavior, in fact, offends global public opinion, exacerbates resentment and thereby spreads terrorism, and tarnishes the US image and its credibility among nations.
The US administration's illegal and immoral behavior is not even confined to outside its borders. You are witnessing daily that under the pretext of "the war on terror," civil liberties in the United States are being increasingly curtailed. Even the privacy of individuals is fast losing its meaning. Judicial due process and fundamental rights are trampled upon. Private phones are tapped, suspects are arbitrarily arrested, sometimes beaten in the streets, or even shot to death.
I have no doubt that the American people do not approve of this behavior and indeed deplore it.
The US administration does not accept accountability before any organization, institution or council. The US administration has undermined the credibility of international organizations, particularly the United Nations and its Security Council. But, I do not intend to address all the challenges and calamities in this message.
The legitimacy, power and influence of a government do not emanate from its arsenals of tanks, fighter aircraft, missiles or nuclear weapons. Legitimacy and influence reside in sound logic, quest for justice and compassion and empathy for all humanity. The global position of the United States is in all probability weakened because the administration has continued to resort to force, to conceal the truth, and to mislead the American people about its policies and practices.
Undoubtedly, the American people are not satisfied with this behavior and they showed their discontent in the recent elections. I hope that in the wake of the mid-term elections, the administration of President Bush will have heard and will heed the message of the American people.
My questions are the following:
Is there not a better approach to governance?
Is it not possible to put wealth and power in the service of peace, stability, prosperity and the happiness of all peoples through a commitment to justice and respect for the rights of all nations, instead of aggression and war?
We all condemn terrorism, because its victims are the innocent.
But, can terrorism be contained and eradicated through war, destruction and the killing of hundreds of thousands of innocents? If that were possible, then why has the problem not been resolved? The sad experience of invading Iraq is before us all.
What has blind support for the Zionists by the US administration brought for the American people? It is regrettable that for the US administration, the interests of these occupiers supersedes the interests of the American people and of the other nations of the world.
What have the Zionists done for the American people that the US administration considers itself obliged to blindly support these infamous aggressors? Is it not because they have imposed themselves on a substantial portion of the banking, financial, cultural and media sectors?
I recommend that in a demonstration of respect for the American people and for humanity, the right of Palestinians to live in their own homeland should be recognized so that millions of Palestinian refugees can return to their homes and the future of all of Palestine and its form of government be determined in a referendum. This will benefit everyone.
Now that Iraq has a Constitution and an independent Assembly and Government, would it not be more beneficial to bring the US officers and soldiers home, and to spend the astronomical US military expenditures in Iraq for the welfare and prosperity of the American people? As you know very well, many victims of Katrina continue to suffer, and countless Americans continue to live in poverty and homelessness.
I'd also like to say a word to the winners of the recent elections in the US:
The United States has had many administrations; some who have left a positive legacy, and others that are neither remembered fondly by the American people nor by other nations.
Now that you control an important branch of the US Government, you will also be held to account by the people and by history.
If the US Government meets the current domestic and external challenges with an approach based on truth and justice, it can remedy some of the past afflictions and alleviate some of the global resentment and hatred of America. But if the approach remains the same, it would not be unexpected that the American people would similarly reject the new electoral winners, although the recent elections, rather than reflecting a victory, in reality point to the failure of the current administration's policies. These issues had been extensively dealt with in my letter to President Bush earlier this year.
To sum up:
It is possible to govern based on an approach that is distinctly different from one of coercion, force and injustice.
It is possible to sincerely serve and promote common human values, honesty and compassion.
It is possible to provide welfare and prosperity without tension, threats, imposition or war.
It is possible to lead the world towards the aspired perfection by adhering to unity, monotheism, morality and spirituality and drawing upon the teachings of the Divine Prophets.
Then, the American people, who are God-fearing and followers of Divine religions, will overcome every difficulty.
What I stated represents some of my anxieties and concerns.
I am confident that you, the American people, will play an instrumental role in the establishment of justice and spirituality throughout the world. The promises of the Almighty and His prophets will certainly be realized, Justice and Truth will prevail and all nations will live a true life in a climate replete with love, compassion and fraternity.
The US governing establishment, the authorities and the powerful should not choose irreversible paths. As all prophets have taught us, injustice and transgression will eventually bring about decline and demise. Today, the path of return to faith and spirituality is open and unimpeded.
We should all heed the Divine Word of the Holy Qur'an:
"But those who repent, have faith and do good may receive Salvation. Your Lord, alone, creates and chooses as He will, and others have no part in His choice; Glorified is God and Exalted above any partners they ascribe to Him." (28:67-68)
I pray to the Almighty to bless the Iranian and American nations and indeed all nations of the world with dignity and success.
Source
September 21, 2006
Interview with CNN
COOPER: At the U.N., you spoke with great passion of of brotherhood, of peace and respect for all nations. Yet, in Tehran last year, you spoke about wiping Israel off the face of the map. That doesn't sound to many people in the United States like great respect for other nations.
Do you want to wipe Israel off the face of the map?
AHMADINEJAD: I'm surprised why American politicians are so sensitive and biased with regard to Israel. Is there a relationship, to speak with such prejudice?
Everyone is prevented from questioning the regime. Whenever a question is raised, some American politicians react very strongly to it, whereas we know there's a lot being said about many other countries around the world.
Lebanon was bombarded. In Ghana, people were killed with laser bombs. But it doesn't seem to have created concern among American politicians as much. But when somebody questions or criticizes the Zionist regime, there's so much reaction. Could you tell me why this is the case?
I would think it would be a good question to ask from American politicians, the extent of the prejudice we see with them about Israel, given the massacres committed by Israel, killing people in their own homes. Should they not be subject to criticism? Should nobody complain and raise objections about the violations of rights and the murders that they commit? Are they free to do such acts?
Should they not act within the framework of any law?
COOPER: To some in America, though, that is going to sound like you're not answering the question. The question really is, do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
AHMADINEJAD: I say that it is an occupying regime.
We say we must -- you must allow the Palestinian nation to decide for itself what its fate should be. There are 5 million displaced Palestinians, 4 million who live under the threat of bombardments, or actual bombardments and attacks.
So, let Palestinian people decide for themselves. We support the vote of the people. And whatever the result is, we must all accept. Why should there be objection to this proposal, or to the vote of the people to indicate their will? Don't the people in Palestine have the right to live? Are they not human beings? They live in their own homeland. In their own homeland, they are under attack.
COOPER: The same statement could be said of Jewish people in Israel, that they're living in what they say is their homeland. Don't they have a right to exist?
AHMADINEJAD: Yes, in Palestine, there were a group of Jews that lived there. But where did they come from afterward, the larger groups that came to Palestine?
We know what the trend was. A group of people came from other places to that land. Where does the father of Mr. [Ehud] Olmert come from, for example? Some of the ministers in Israel are in fact of Iranian origin, with no background, historical background, in Palestine. But they're there, ruling.
COOPER: So, you're saying, really, they don't belong there; they should go somewhere else?
AHMADINEJAD: I am saying, let the Palestinian people decide. The Palestinian people should decide what to do. And among Palestinians, there are Jews, Muslims and Christians.
Our question is, what about the rights of the Palestinian people? They lived there, and they were displaced and forced to leave their own homeland, under the threat of a gun, and, regretfully, with the support of the American government.
What is happening to the Palestinians? Do they not have the right? Shouldn't we be thinking about that? Their young people are being killed on the streets. Homes are being destroyed over their heads, even in Gaza, even in the West Bank.
After all, they are human beings, too. They have the right to life and to live in their own homeland. Others have come from far and beyond, and are now there ruling there and governing that land.
Why did they go there? They should return to where they came from. Or, even if they don't, they should at least allow the Palestinian nation to decide about that and the future.
So what I'm saying is quite clear. We want peace to be established there. We care for the Jews who live under pressure there as well, because they too are living outside their own homes, far from where they belong, their homeland, actually. That is not their homeland.
COOPER: You have repeatedly implied that the Holocaust never happened. And implied that more research needs to be done on whether or not it did happen. The argument could be made that the genocide was perhaps the most well-documented genocide of the 20th century. Do you really believe that the Holocaust never happened?
AHMADINEJAD: If this event happened, where did it happen? The where is the main question. And it was not in Palestine. Why is the Holocaust used as a pretext to occupy the Palestinian lands?
COOPER: But do you understand why it's deeply offensive to people?
AHMADINEJAD: That subject, how is it connected to the occupying regime in Jerusalem?
COOPER: You do realize though why it would be deeply offensive to so many people that you even say "if it ever happened"?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, you don't speak here for all Americans. In the past two or three days, I have met with many members of the media and the press here, some who are even related to the U.S. government. But the questions are the same across the board.
COOPER: Why can't you believe there was a Holocaust and support Palestinians?
AHMADINEJAD: No, that's not a reason at all.
The subject of the Holocaust is a different subject. I raised two or three questions that were very clear about it. I said that, in World War II, 60 million people lost their lives. They were killed. Two million of them were noncivilians, so to say, military. The rest were civilian populations.
And they all lost their lives. Their lives were all cared for and respected. But why is it that we concentrate so much on the lives of a group among the 60 million?
The second question is, assuming that this happened, why don't they allow more research and studies to be done about it? If it is a truth that happened, then we will need more clarity about it. And they must be impartial groups, or whoever who is interested should be able to do the research. Why is that prevented?
COOPER: President Bush, at the U.N., tried to speak directly to the Iranian people yesterday. And he said ...
AHMADINEJAD: Did you get the answer you wanted about the Holocaust?
COOPER: No, I didn't, but I know my time is limited.
It is a fascinating subject. ...
AHMADINEJAD: Are you asking the questions that are on your mind or questions that are given to you by others?
COOPER: Actually, in America, we have a free press, unlike in parts of Iran.
But I'm asking the questions that I'm interested in. But I know your time is short. Frankly, I would love to talk to you for two hours. But ...
AHMADINEJAD: Well, given that all the questions are very similar, it speaks for itself.
It seems to me that Mr. Bush fails to understand the reality of the world today, the conditions that beset the world today. This is not the kind of language you speak talking with a great nation. It's an insult to a great nation. I don't know what he is actually thinking, when he makes remarks like that. I invite him to speak for half an hour with our nation every day. And everyone will listen to what he has to say, but nothing will be resolved.
COOPER: He gave his message to the Iranian people. What is your message to the American people? What do you want them to know about Iran, about you?
AHMADINEJAD: Our message is a message of peace and brotherhood with all nations, with all people. And we like all nations and people. We are against oppression and injustice. And we love the American people, as we love our own. We respect everyone. And to clarify issues, I called Mr. Bush to debate. I propose that we sit and have a debate to talk about our positions, to discuss issues and allow everyone around the world to hear the debate. It was a great suggestion, I think, because I believe that, after all, it is the public opinion, the world public opinion, that must have information and decide.
COOPER: Your ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, today, speaking at the [U.N.] General Assembly, called President Bush a devil and said that he smelled sulfur.
I'm wondering what you think of his comments and whether you smelled any sulfur when you were speaking at the General Assembly.
AHMADINEJAD: Do you want to interview me or Mr. Chavez, perhaps?
COOPER: You have no thoughts on his comments?
AHMADINEJAD: I think that the United Nations offers a podium for everyone. And everybody can speak of what they think. So let's keep it open.
COOPER: You said at the U.N. yesterday that your nuclear program is, quote, "transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors." That's not what [International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors have said. In a recent report they have said that they frankly cannot verify the peaceful nature of your program and that it is not transparent.
Why not just open up the program and fulfill all the requirements that the IAEA would like?
AHMADINEJAD: They said that they did not find any evidence or sign, although they must continue inspections. And they're welcome to continue inspections at all times.
COOPER: The report that ...
AHMADINEJAD: The IAEA has declared that on numerous occasions in fact. And we know that that is not the first time they've stated that.
COOPER: The report that I read in August said Iran has not addressed the long outstanding verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associated with some of its activities. [IAEA chief] Mohamed ElBaradei was quoted as saying that he can't give you a clean bill of health yet.
AHMADINEJAD: Perhaps the report that you had and saw is incomplete. The IAEA has indicated that it has found no evidence that would show that Iran is developing a nuclear energy for other purposes that are other than peaceful.
So I like to ask ... are you positive that the United States of America in fact has not diverted from its own nuclear programs to develop, perhaps nuclear devices, that are not for peaceful purposes? The United States, are you telling me, is not building a nuclear bomb? Are you not concerned about that?
There has been no evidence saying that we are doing any such activities. Then why should there be a furor of concern among people, among groups? But please, go on.
COOPER: But well, you say that, without a doubt, your program is for peaceful purposes. The IAEA report I read said that they've not had all the interviews they would like to have. They've not had all the documentation they would like to have.
Are you willing to provide them everything that they say they would like? Or do you feel it's inappropriate that they are pushing too much?
AHMADINEJAD: We're working within the framework of international laws. They might, for example, choose to interview me personally. But that would be stepping beyond the framework of international law.
So they have to tell us exactly what provisions of the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] they're speaking of which they believe we have not abided by. There's no such case. They are interested in getting more information. And we're ready to cooperate with them and provide them with all information within the framework of international law.
Source
Do you want to wipe Israel off the face of the map?
AHMADINEJAD: I'm surprised why American politicians are so sensitive and biased with regard to Israel. Is there a relationship, to speak with such prejudice?
Everyone is prevented from questioning the regime. Whenever a question is raised, some American politicians react very strongly to it, whereas we know there's a lot being said about many other countries around the world.
Lebanon was bombarded. In Ghana, people were killed with laser bombs. But it doesn't seem to have created concern among American politicians as much. But when somebody questions or criticizes the Zionist regime, there's so much reaction. Could you tell me why this is the case?
I would think it would be a good question to ask from American politicians, the extent of the prejudice we see with them about Israel, given the massacres committed by Israel, killing people in their own homes. Should they not be subject to criticism? Should nobody complain and raise objections about the violations of rights and the murders that they commit? Are they free to do such acts?
Should they not act within the framework of any law?
COOPER: To some in America, though, that is going to sound like you're not answering the question. The question really is, do you believe Israel has a right to exist?
AHMADINEJAD: I say that it is an occupying regime.
We say we must -- you must allow the Palestinian nation to decide for itself what its fate should be. There are 5 million displaced Palestinians, 4 million who live under the threat of bombardments, or actual bombardments and attacks.
So, let Palestinian people decide for themselves. We support the vote of the people. And whatever the result is, we must all accept. Why should there be objection to this proposal, or to the vote of the people to indicate their will? Don't the people in Palestine have the right to live? Are they not human beings? They live in their own homeland. In their own homeland, they are under attack.
COOPER: The same statement could be said of Jewish people in Israel, that they're living in what they say is their homeland. Don't they have a right to exist?
AHMADINEJAD: Yes, in Palestine, there were a group of Jews that lived there. But where did they come from afterward, the larger groups that came to Palestine?
We know what the trend was. A group of people came from other places to that land. Where does the father of Mr. [Ehud] Olmert come from, for example? Some of the ministers in Israel are in fact of Iranian origin, with no background, historical background, in Palestine. But they're there, ruling.
COOPER: So, you're saying, really, they don't belong there; they should go somewhere else?
AHMADINEJAD: I am saying, let the Palestinian people decide. The Palestinian people should decide what to do. And among Palestinians, there are Jews, Muslims and Christians.
Our question is, what about the rights of the Palestinian people? They lived there, and they were displaced and forced to leave their own homeland, under the threat of a gun, and, regretfully, with the support of the American government.
What is happening to the Palestinians? Do they not have the right? Shouldn't we be thinking about that? Their young people are being killed on the streets. Homes are being destroyed over their heads, even in Gaza, even in the West Bank.
After all, they are human beings, too. They have the right to life and to live in their own homeland. Others have come from far and beyond, and are now there ruling there and governing that land.
Why did they go there? They should return to where they came from. Or, even if they don't, they should at least allow the Palestinian nation to decide about that and the future.
So what I'm saying is quite clear. We want peace to be established there. We care for the Jews who live under pressure there as well, because they too are living outside their own homes, far from where they belong, their homeland, actually. That is not their homeland.
COOPER: You have repeatedly implied that the Holocaust never happened. And implied that more research needs to be done on whether or not it did happen. The argument could be made that the genocide was perhaps the most well-documented genocide of the 20th century. Do you really believe that the Holocaust never happened?
AHMADINEJAD: If this event happened, where did it happen? The where is the main question. And it was not in Palestine. Why is the Holocaust used as a pretext to occupy the Palestinian lands?
COOPER: But do you understand why it's deeply offensive to people?
AHMADINEJAD: That subject, how is it connected to the occupying regime in Jerusalem?
COOPER: You do realize though why it would be deeply offensive to so many people that you even say "if it ever happened"?
AHMADINEJAD: Well, you don't speak here for all Americans. In the past two or three days, I have met with many members of the media and the press here, some who are even related to the U.S. government. But the questions are the same across the board.
COOPER: Why can't you believe there was a Holocaust and support Palestinians?
AHMADINEJAD: No, that's not a reason at all.
The subject of the Holocaust is a different subject. I raised two or three questions that were very clear about it. I said that, in World War II, 60 million people lost their lives. They were killed. Two million of them were noncivilians, so to say, military. The rest were civilian populations.
And they all lost their lives. Their lives were all cared for and respected. But why is it that we concentrate so much on the lives of a group among the 60 million?
The second question is, assuming that this happened, why don't they allow more research and studies to be done about it? If it is a truth that happened, then we will need more clarity about it. And they must be impartial groups, or whoever who is interested should be able to do the research. Why is that prevented?
COOPER: President Bush, at the U.N., tried to speak directly to the Iranian people yesterday. And he said ...
AHMADINEJAD: Did you get the answer you wanted about the Holocaust?
COOPER: No, I didn't, but I know my time is limited.
It is a fascinating subject. ...
AHMADINEJAD: Are you asking the questions that are on your mind or questions that are given to you by others?
COOPER: Actually, in America, we have a free press, unlike in parts of Iran.
But I'm asking the questions that I'm interested in. But I know your time is short. Frankly, I would love to talk to you for two hours. But ...
AHMADINEJAD: Well, given that all the questions are very similar, it speaks for itself.
It seems to me that Mr. Bush fails to understand the reality of the world today, the conditions that beset the world today. This is not the kind of language you speak talking with a great nation. It's an insult to a great nation. I don't know what he is actually thinking, when he makes remarks like that. I invite him to speak for half an hour with our nation every day. And everyone will listen to what he has to say, but nothing will be resolved.
COOPER: He gave his message to the Iranian people. What is your message to the American people? What do you want them to know about Iran, about you?
AHMADINEJAD: Our message is a message of peace and brotherhood with all nations, with all people. And we like all nations and people. We are against oppression and injustice. And we love the American people, as we love our own. We respect everyone. And to clarify issues, I called Mr. Bush to debate. I propose that we sit and have a debate to talk about our positions, to discuss issues and allow everyone around the world to hear the debate. It was a great suggestion, I think, because I believe that, after all, it is the public opinion, the world public opinion, that must have information and decide.
COOPER: Your ally, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, today, speaking at the [U.N.] General Assembly, called President Bush a devil and said that he smelled sulfur.
I'm wondering what you think of his comments and whether you smelled any sulfur when you were speaking at the General Assembly.
AHMADINEJAD: Do you want to interview me or Mr. Chavez, perhaps?
COOPER: You have no thoughts on his comments?
AHMADINEJAD: I think that the United Nations offers a podium for everyone. And everybody can speak of what they think. So let's keep it open.
COOPER: You said at the U.N. yesterday that your nuclear program is, quote, "transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors." That's not what [International Atomic Energy Agency] inspectors have said. In a recent report they have said that they frankly cannot verify the peaceful nature of your program and that it is not transparent.
Why not just open up the program and fulfill all the requirements that the IAEA would like?
AHMADINEJAD: They said that they did not find any evidence or sign, although they must continue inspections. And they're welcome to continue inspections at all times.
COOPER: The report that ...
AHMADINEJAD: The IAEA has declared that on numerous occasions in fact. And we know that that is not the first time they've stated that.
COOPER: The report that I read in August said Iran has not addressed the long outstanding verification issues or provided the necessary transparency to remove uncertainties associated with some of its activities. [IAEA chief] Mohamed ElBaradei was quoted as saying that he can't give you a clean bill of health yet.
AHMADINEJAD: Perhaps the report that you had and saw is incomplete. The IAEA has indicated that it has found no evidence that would show that Iran is developing a nuclear energy for other purposes that are other than peaceful.
So I like to ask ... are you positive that the United States of America in fact has not diverted from its own nuclear programs to develop, perhaps nuclear devices, that are not for peaceful purposes? The United States, are you telling me, is not building a nuclear bomb? Are you not concerned about that?
There has been no evidence saying that we are doing any such activities. Then why should there be a furor of concern among people, among groups? But please, go on.
COOPER: But well, you say that, without a doubt, your program is for peaceful purposes. The IAEA report I read said that they've not had all the interviews they would like to have. They've not had all the documentation they would like to have.
Are you willing to provide them everything that they say they would like? Or do you feel it's inappropriate that they are pushing too much?
AHMADINEJAD: We're working within the framework of international laws. They might, for example, choose to interview me personally. But that would be stepping beyond the framework of international law.
So they have to tell us exactly what provisions of the NPT [Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty] they're speaking of which they believe we have not abided by. There's no such case. They are interested in getting more information. And we're ready to cooperate with them and provide them with all information within the framework of international law.
Source
September 19, 2006
Speech at UN General Assembly
In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. Praise be to God and peace be upon Prophet Mohammad and His Infallible Household and chosen disciples. O God, hasten the reappearance of the Imam of the times and grant to us victory and prosperity. Include us among his followers and martyrs.
Madam President,
Distinguished Heads of State and Government,
Distinguished Heads of Delegation,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I praise the Merciful, All-Knowing and Almighty God for blessing me with another opportunity to address this Assembly on behalf of the great nation of Iran and to bring a number of issues to the attention of the international community.
I also praise the Almighty for the increasing vigilance of peoples across the globe, their courageous presence in different international settings, and the brave expression of their views and aspirations regarding global issues.
Today, humanity passionately craves for commitment to the Truth, devotion to God, enforcement of justice and respect for the dignity of human beings, elimination of domination and aggression, and defense of the oppressed. And a longing for peace constitutes the legitimate demand of the peoples of the world, particularly the new generations and the spirited youth, who aspire to a world free from decadence, aggression and injustice, and replete with love and compassion. The youth have a right to seek justice and truth; and they have a right to build their own future on the foundations of love, compassion and tranquility. And, I praise the Almighty for this immense blessing.
Madam President,
Excellencies,
What afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human dignity; the Almighty has not created human beings so that they could transgress on others and oppress them.
By causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination, accumulating greater wealth and usurping all resources, while others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery.
Some seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others live in perpetual insecurity and danger.
Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.
Such behavior is not consistent with the status of human beings and runs counter to the Truth, to justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question is that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek justice? Who or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed, and suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the seat of global justice?
A brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues can further illustrate the problem.
A. The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons:
Some powers proudly announce their production of second and third generation nuclear weapons. What do they need these weapons for? Is the development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to promote peace and democracy? Or are these weapons, in fact, instruments of coercion and threats against other peoples and governments? How long should the people of the world live with the nightmare of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons? To what length can powers producing and possessing these weapons go? How can they be held accountable before the international community? And, are the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste resulting from the use of their wealth and resources for the production of destructive arsenals? Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead of on instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more compatible with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and biological weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then oppression and aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither away and no reason will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition because most global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from the powerful not being content with their own rights and still striving to devour the rights of others.
People across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice for its sake.
Would it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and win hearts and minds through the championing of real justice, compassion and peace than by continuing their production and proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of their use?
The experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons is before us. Has it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than exacerbation of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?
B. Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities
Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three years. Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq. Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society, and instigate civil strife.
There is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political will to eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists were apprehended by the Government of Iraq only to be let loose under various pretexts by the occupiers.
It seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves as a pretext for the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.
Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the Government of Iraq seek justice?
Who can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire region. Can the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security in Iraq when the occupiers are themselves among the permanent members of the Council? Can the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?
Consider the situation in Palestine:
The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War. Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that war, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the war's survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world who had not been even affected by the war; and a government was established in the territory of others with a population collected from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land into a diaspora and homelessness. This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history. Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee camps and many have died still hoping to one day return to their homeland. Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?
The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif [Jerusalem] are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to merely speak about them, as they fear that the shedding of light on the facts would undermine the raison d'etre of this regime, as it already has.
The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception, the regime has been a constant source of threats and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the region.
Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.
Worst yet is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime.
Just watch what is happening in Palestinian lands. People are being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?
At the same time, a government is formed democratically and through the free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of democracy, its ministers and members of parliament are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.
Which council or international organization stands up to protect this brutally besieged government? And why can't the Security Council take any steps?
Let me here address Lebanon:
For thirty-three long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced.
Meanwhile, some members of the Security Council practically chose a path that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its objectives militarily. We witnessed the Security Council of the United Nations practically incapacitated by certain powers to even call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat idly by for so many days witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities against the Lebanese while tragedies such as Qana were persistently repeated. Why?
In all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind the hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council, how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?
C. Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international community
Excellencies,
I now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people and speak about the injustices against them.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends, including the production of nuclear bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.
Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?
The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.
Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten others in the Security Council and seek condemnation, even before any decision by the Council, of their opponents by the Council.
The questions are: What can justify such exploitation of the Security Council? Does this not erode the credibility and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to maintain security?
Excellencies,
A review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the conclusion that regrettably, justice has become a victim of force and aggression.
Many global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and irresponsible as a result of undue pressure from certain powers;
Threats of nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some powers have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility;
For some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy can only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure and intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the interests of rightful claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right of self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and obligations of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value. This is blatantly manifested in the way the elected government of the Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support extended to the Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine, turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned or besieged -- these do not violate human rights.
Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by international law. Enjoyment of these rights is dependent on the whim of certain major powers.
Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the security and the rights of some big powers. When the oppressed are crushed by bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and not even call for a ceasefire. Is this not a tragedy of historic proportions for the Security Council which is charged with maintaining security for all countries?
The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such that certain powers equate themselves with the international community, and consider their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries. They consider themselves the masters and rulers of the entire world and other nations as only second class in the world order.
Excellencies,
The question needs to be asked: if the governments of the United States or the United Kingdom, who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?
Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms, including the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness of this most universal system of collective security.
Excellencies,
How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.
The present structure and working methods of the Security Council, which are legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive to the expectations of the current generation and the contemporary needs of humanity.
Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective.
Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not, expect the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the Council.
Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves about the world in which they want to live?
Today, serious reform in the structure and working methods of the Security Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming the Organization and particularly rescue the Security Council from its current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African continent should each have a representative as a permanent member of the Security Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance would hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.
Madam President,
Excellencies,
It is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful place in international relations. Without ethics and spirituality, attained in light of the teachings of Divine prophets, justice, freedom and human rights cannot be guaranteed.
Resolution of contemporary human crises lies in observing ethics and spirituality and governance by righteous people of high competence and piety.
Should respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant objective, injustice, ill-temper, aggression and war will fade away.
Human beings are all God's creatures and are all endowed with dignity and respect.
No one has superiority over others. No individual or state can arrogate to themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the rights of others and, through influence and pressure, position themselves as the `international community'.
Citizens of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six billion inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.
Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in maintaining sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the world.
It is for this reason that we state:
Sustainable peace and tranquility in the world can only be attained through justice, spirituality, ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity.
All nations and states are entitled to peace, progress and security.
We are all members of the international community and we are all entitled to insist on the creation of a climate of compassion, love and justice.
All members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter and the sweet events and developments in today's world.
We can adopt firm and logical decisions thereby improving the prospects of a better life for current and future generations.
Together, we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and afflictions, and through promotion of universal and lasting values such as ethics, spirituality and justice, allow our nations to taste the sweetness of a better future.
Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek good, virtue, perfection and geauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection.
Whether we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or later prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is imperative, and also desirable, that we, too, contribute to the promotion of justice and virtue.
The Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe, is also its Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands His creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety, and not in decadence and corruption.
He commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness and virtue and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets from the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called humanity to monotheism, justice, brotherhood, love and compassion. Is it not possible to build a better world based on monotheism, justice, love and respect for the rights of human beings, and thereby transform animosities into friendship?
I emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before, longs for just and righteous people with love for all humanity; and above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has been promised to all peoples and who will establish justice, peace and brotherhood on the planet.
O, Almighty God, all men and women are your creatures and you have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by you, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause.
Source
Madam President,
Distinguished Heads of State and Government,
Distinguished Heads of Delegation,
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen:
I praise the Merciful, All-Knowing and Almighty God for blessing me with another opportunity to address this Assembly on behalf of the great nation of Iran and to bring a number of issues to the attention of the international community.
I also praise the Almighty for the increasing vigilance of peoples across the globe, their courageous presence in different international settings, and the brave expression of their views and aspirations regarding global issues.
Today, humanity passionately craves for commitment to the Truth, devotion to God, enforcement of justice and respect for the dignity of human beings, elimination of domination and aggression, and defense of the oppressed. And a longing for peace constitutes the legitimate demand of the peoples of the world, particularly the new generations and the spirited youth, who aspire to a world free from decadence, aggression and injustice, and replete with love and compassion. The youth have a right to seek justice and truth; and they have a right to build their own future on the foundations of love, compassion and tranquility. And, I praise the Almighty for this immense blessing.
Madam President,
Excellencies,
What afflicts humanity today is certainly not compatible with human dignity; the Almighty has not created human beings so that they could transgress on others and oppress them.
By causing war and conflict, some are fast expanding their domination, accumulating greater wealth and usurping all resources, while others endure the resulting poverty, suffering and misery.
Some seek to rule the world relying on weapons and threats, while others live in perpetual insecurity and danger.
Some occupy the homeland of others, thousands of kilometers away from their borders, interfere in their affairs and control their oil and other resources and strategic routes, while others are bombarded daily in their own homes; their children murdered in the streets and alleys of their own country and their homes reduced to rubble.
Such behavior is not consistent with the status of human beings and runs counter to the Truth, to justice and to human dignity. The fundamental question is that under such conditions, where should the oppressed seek justice? Who or what organization defends the rights of the oppressed, and suppresses acts of aggression and oppression? Where is the seat of global justice?
A brief glance at a few examples of the most pressing global issues can further illustrate the problem.
A. The unbridled expansion of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons:
Some powers proudly announce their production of second and third generation nuclear weapons. What do they need these weapons for? Is the development and stockpiling of these deadly weapons designed to promote peace and democracy? Or are these weapons, in fact, instruments of coercion and threats against other peoples and governments? How long should the people of the world live with the nightmare of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons? To what length can powers producing and possessing these weapons go? How can they be held accountable before the international community? And, are the inhabitants of these countries content with the waste resulting from the use of their wealth and resources for the production of destructive arsenals? Is it not possible to rely on justice, ethics and wisdom instead of on instruments of death? Aren't wisdom and justice more compatible with peace and tranquility than nuclear, chemical and biological weapons? If wisdom, ethics and justice prevail, then oppression and aggression will be uprooted, threats will wither away and no reason will remain for conflict. This is a solid proposition because most global conflicts emanate from injustice, and from the powerful not being content with their own rights and still striving to devour the rights of others.
People across the globe embrace justice and are willing to sacrifice for its sake.
Would it not be easier for global powers to ensure their longevity and win hearts and minds through the championing of real justice, compassion and peace than by continuing their production and proliferation of nuclear and chemical weapons and the threat of their use?
The experience of the threat and the use of nuclear weapons is before us. Has it achieved anything for the perpetrators other than exacerbation of tension, hatred and animosity among nations?
B. Occupation of countries and exacerbation of hostilities
Occupation of countries, including Iraq, has continued for the last three years. Not a day goes by without hundreds of people getting killed in cold blood. The occupiers are incapable of establishing security in Iraq. Despite the establishment of the lawful Government and National Assembly of Iraq, there are covert and overt efforts to heighten insecurity, magnify and aggravate differences within Iraqi society, and instigate civil strife.
There is no indication that the occupiers have the necessary political will to eliminate the sources of instability. Numerous terrorists were apprehended by the Government of Iraq only to be let loose under various pretexts by the occupiers.
It seems that intensification of hostilities and terrorism serves as a pretext for the continued presence of foreign forces in Iraq.
Where can the people of Iraq seek refuge, and from whom should the Government of Iraq seek justice?
Who can ensure Iraq's security? Insecurity in Iraq affects the entire region. Can the Security Council play a role in restoring peace and security in Iraq when the occupiers are themselves among the permanent members of the Council? Can the Security Council adopt a fair decision in this regard?
Consider the situation in Palestine:
The roots of the Palestinian problem go back to the Second World War. Under the pretext of protecting some of the survivors of that war, the land of Palestine was occupied through war, aggression and the displacement of millions of its inhabitants; it was placed under the control of some of the war's survivors, bringing even larger population groups from elsewhere in the world who had not been even affected by the war; and a government was established in the territory of others with a population collected from across the world at the expense of driving millions of the rightful inhabitants of the land into a diaspora and homelessness. This is a great tragedy with hardly a precedent in history. Refugees continue to live in temporary refugee camps and many have died still hoping to one day return to their homeland. Can any logic, law or legal reasoning justify this tragedy? Can any member of the United Nations accept such a tragedy occurring in their own homeland?
The pretexts for the creation of the regime occupying Al-Qods Al-Sharif [Jerusalem] are so weak that its proponents want to silence any voice trying to merely speak about them, as they fear that the shedding of light on the facts would undermine the raison d'etre of this regime, as it already has.
The tragedy does not end with the establishment of a regime in the territory of others. Regrettably, from its inception, the regime has been a constant source of threats and insecurity in the Middle East region, waging war and spilling blood and impeding the progress of regional countries, and has also been used by some powers as an instrument of division, coercion, and pressure on the people of the region.
Reference to these historical realities may cause some disquiet among supporters of this regime. But these are sheer facts and not myth. History has unfolded before our eyes.
Worst yet is the blanket and unwarranted support provided to this regime.
Just watch what is happening in Palestinian lands. People are being bombarded in their own homes and their children murdered in their own streets and alleys. But no authority, not even the Security Council, can afford them any support or protection. Why?
At the same time, a government is formed democratically and through the free choice of the electorate in a part of the Palestinian territory. But instead of receiving the support of the so-called champions of democracy, its ministers and members of parliament are illegally abducted and incarcerated in full view of the international community.
Which council or international organization stands up to protect this brutally besieged government? And why can't the Security Council take any steps?
Let me here address Lebanon:
For thirty-three long days, the Lebanese lived under the barrage of fire and bombs and close to 1.5 million of them were displaced.
Meanwhile, some members of the Security Council practically chose a path that provided ample opportunity for the aggressor to achieve its objectives militarily. We witnessed the Security Council of the United Nations practically incapacitated by certain powers to even call for a ceasefire. The Security Council sat idly by for so many days witnessing the cruel scenes of atrocities against the Lebanese while tragedies such as Qana were persistently repeated. Why?
In all these cases, the answer is self-evident. When the power behind the hostilities is itself a permanent member of the Security Council, how then can this Council fulfill its responsibilities?
C. Lack of respect for the rights of members of the international community
Excellencies,
I now wish to refer to some of the grievances of the Iranian people and speak about the injustices against them.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a member of the IAEA and is committed to the NPT. All our nuclear activities are transparent, peaceful and under the watchful eyes of IAEA inspectors. Why then are there objections to our legally recognized rights? Which governments object to these rights? Governments that themselves benefit from nuclear energy and the fuel cycle. Some of them have abused nuclear technology for non-peaceful ends, including the production of nuclear bombs, and some even have a bleak record of using them against humanity.
Which organization or Council should address these injustices? Is the Security Council in a position to address them? Can it stop violations of the inalienable rights of countries? Can it prevent certain powers from impeding scientific progress of other countries?
The abuse of the Security Council, as an instrument of threat and coercion, is indeed a source of grave concern.
Some permanent members of the Security Council, even when they are themselves parties to international disputes, conveniently threaten others in the Security Council and seek condemnation, even before any decision by the Council, of their opponents by the Council.
The questions are: What can justify such exploitation of the Security Council? Does this not erode the credibility and effectiveness of the Council? Can such behavior contribute to the ability of the Council to maintain security?
Excellencies,
A review of the preceding historical realities would lead to the conclusion that regrettably, justice has become a victim of force and aggression.
Many global arrangements have become unjust, discriminatory and irresponsible as a result of undue pressure from certain powers;
Threats of nuclear weapons and other instruments of war by some powers have taken the place of respect for the rights of nations and the maintenance and promotion of peace and tranquility;
For some powers, claims of promotion of human rights and democracy can only last as long as they can be used as instruments of pressure and intimidation against other nations. But when it comes to the interests of rightful claimants, concepts such as democracy, the right of self-determination of nations, respect for the rights and obligations of peoples, international law and justice have no place or value. This is blatantly manifested in the way the elected government of the Palestinian people is treated as well as in the support extended to the Zionist regime. It does not matter if people are murdered in Palestine, turned into refugees, captured, imprisoned or besieged -- these do not violate human rights.
Nations are not equal in exercising their rights recognized by international law. Enjoyment of these rights is dependent on the whim of certain major powers.
Apparently the Security Council can only be used to ensure the security and the rights of some big powers. When the oppressed are crushed by bombardment, the Security Council must remain aloof and not even call for a ceasefire. Is this not a tragedy of historic proportions for the Security Council which is charged with maintaining security for all countries?
The prevailing order of contemporary global interactions is such that certain powers equate themselves with the international community, and consider their decisions superseding that of over 180 countries. They consider themselves the masters and rulers of the entire world and other nations as only second class in the world order.
Excellencies,
The question needs to be asked: if the governments of the United States or the United Kingdom, who are permanent members of the Security Council, commit aggression, occupation and violation of international law, which of the organs of the UN can take them to account? Can a Council in which they are privileged members address their violations? Has this ever happened? In fact, we have repeatedly seen the reverse. If they have differences with a nation or state, they drag it to the Security Council and as claimants, arrogate to themselves simultaneously the roles of prosecutor, judge and executioner. Is this a just order? Can there be a more vivid case of discrimination and more clear evidence of injustice?
Regrettably, the persistence of some hegemonic powers in imposing their exclusionist policies on international decision making mechanisms, including the Security Council, has resulted in a growing mistrust in global public opinion, undermining the credibility and effectiveness of this most universal system of collective security.
Excellencies,
How long can such a situation last in the world? It is evident that the behavior of some powers constitutes the greatest challenge before the Security Council, the entire organization and its affiliated agencies.
The present structure and working methods of the Security Council, which are legacies of the Second World War, are not responsive to the expectations of the current generation and the contemporary needs of humanity.
Today, it is undeniable that the Security Council, most critically and urgently, needs legitimacy and effectiveness. It must be acknowledged that as long as the Council is unable to act on behalf of the entire international community in a transparent, just and democratic manner, it will neither be legitimate nor effective.
Furthermore, the direct relation between the abuse of veto and the erosion of the legitimacy and effectiveness of the Council has now been clearly and undeniably established. We cannot, and should not, expect the eradication, or even containment, of injustice, imposition and oppression without reforming the structure and working methods of the Council.
Is it appropriate to expect this generation to submit to the decisions and arrangements established over half a century ago? Doesn't this generation or future generations have the right to decide themselves about the world in which they want to live?
Today, serious reform in the structure and working methods of the Security Council is, more than ever before, necessary. Justice and democracy dictate that the role of the General Assembly, as the highest organ of the United Nations, must be respected. The General Assembly can then, through appropriate mechanisms, take on the task of reforming the Organization and particularly rescue the Security Council from its current state. In the interim, the Non-Aligned Movement, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the African continent should each have a representative as a permanent member of the Security Council, with veto privilege. The resulting balance would hopefully prevent further trampling of the rights of nations.
Madam President,
Excellencies,
It is essential that spirituality and ethics find their rightful place in international relations. Without ethics and spirituality, attained in light of the teachings of Divine prophets, justice, freedom and human rights cannot be guaranteed.
Resolution of contemporary human crises lies in observing ethics and spirituality and governance by righteous people of high competence and piety.
Should respect for the rights of human beings become the predominant objective, injustice, ill-temper, aggression and war will fade away.
Human beings are all God's creatures and are all endowed with dignity and respect.
No one has superiority over others. No individual or state can arrogate to themselves special privileges, nor can they disregard the rights of others and, through influence and pressure, position themselves as the `international community'.
Citizens of Asia, Africa, Europe and America are all equal. Over six billion inhabitants of the earth are all equal and worthy of respect.
Justice and protection of human dignity are the two pillars in maintaining sustainable peace, security and tranquility in the world.
It is for this reason that we state:
Sustainable peace and tranquility in the world can only be attained through justice, spirituality, ethics, compassion and respect for human dignity.
All nations and states are entitled to peace, progress and security.
We are all members of the international community and we are all entitled to insist on the creation of a climate of compassion, love and justice.
All members of the United Nations are affected by both the bitter and the sweet events and developments in today's world.
We can adopt firm and logical decisions thereby improving the prospects of a better life for current and future generations.
Together, we can eradicate the roots of bitter maladies and afflictions, and through promotion of universal and lasting values such as ethics, spirituality and justice, allow our nations to taste the sweetness of a better future.
Peoples, driven by their divine nature, intrinsically seek good, virtue, perfection and geauty. Relying on our peoples, we can take giant steps towards reform and pave the road for human perfection.
Whether we like it or not, justice, peace and virtue will sooner or later prevail in the world with the will of Almighty God. It is imperative, and also desirable, that we, too, contribute to the promotion of justice and virtue.
The Almighty and Merciful God, who is the Creator of the Universe, is also its Lord and Ruler. Justice is His command. He commands His creatures to support one another in Good, virtue and piety, and not in decadence and corruption.
He commands His creatures to enjoin one another to righteousness and virtue and not to sin and transgression. All Divine prophets from the Prophet Adam (peace be upon him) to the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon him), to the Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him), have all called humanity to monotheism, justice, brotherhood, love and compassion. Is it not possible to build a better world based on monotheism, justice, love and respect for the rights of human beings, and thereby transform animosities into friendship?
I emphatically declare that today's world, more than ever before, longs for just and righteous people with love for all humanity; and above all longs for the perfect righteous human being and the real savior who has been promised to all peoples and who will establish justice, peace and brotherhood on the planet.
O, Almighty God, all men and women are your creatures and you have ordained their guidance and salvation. Bestow upon humanity that thirsts for justice, the perfect human being promised to all by you, and make us among his followers and among those who strive for his return and his cause.
Source
August 13, 2006
Interview on CBS program 60 Minutes
[This is a transcript of the part of the interview that was broadcast on the 60 Minutes program. A link to the full three-part video of the interview is given at the end of this post.]
"Very clearly, I will tell you that I fully oppose the behavior of the British and the Americans," President Ahmadinejad tells Wallace. "They are providing state-of-the-art military hardware to the Zionists. And they are throwing their full support behind Israel. We believe that this threatens the future of all peoples, including the American and European peoples. So we are asking why the American government is blindly supporting this murderous regime."
"The laser-guided bombs that have been given to the Zionists are targeting the shelters of defenseless children and women," the president said.
"Who supports Hezbollah?" Wallace asked. "Who has given Hezbollah hundreds of millions of dollars for years? Who has given Hezbollah Iranian-made missiles and rockets that are making all kinds …" he continued as he was interrupted.
"Are you the representative of the Zionist regime? Or a journalist?" President Ahmadinejad asked Wallace.
"I'm a journalist. I am a journalist," Wallace replied.
"This is not journalism, sir. Hezbollah is a popular organization in Lebanon, and they are defending their land," the president said. "They are defending their own houses. And, according to the charter of the United Nations, every person has the right to defend his house.
"What I'm saying is that the killing of innocents is reprehensible. And making this — the displacement of people and making them refugees, again, is reprehensible."
"Well, what has Hezbollah, though — wait a minute," Wallace asked. "Hezbollah is displacing and damaging and making bleed all kinds of people. You know that."
"Please tell me, are the Lebanese inside the occupied lands right now or is it the other way around, that the Zionist troops are in Lebanese territory?" President Ahmadinejad replied. "Lebanon is defending its independence. We are not at all happy with war. That is why on the first day we condemned the recent conflict. And we asked for an immediate ceasefire."
"The United Nations Security Council is there to safeguard the interests of the British and the Americans. They are not there to provide security. It's very clear," the president said.
"The UNSC, the United Nations Security Council, is there to protect the interests of the United States and the British. That's what you say?" Wallace asked.
"It has been created to help with peace and justice. But we see that it is not responding to atrocities. If we search for the root causes we see the hand of the British and the Americans," President Ahmadinejad said. "People, innocent people are being killed. … And houses are being destroyed. Where is the UNSC? Also, the draft resolution which has been circulated only serves the interests of one party. And it is not just."
And, he told Wallace, the Security Council is also doing America's bidding by trying to prevent Iran from developing nuclear energy. The Security Council is demanding that Iran stop all uranium enrichment by the end of this month.
"But if Mr. Bush thinks that he can stop our progress, I have to say that he will be unable to do that," President Ahmadinejad said.
"We want to have access to nuclear technology. We want to produce fuel. Do you not think that the most important issue of the world of tomorrow will be energy?
"We think that Mr. Bush's team and the parties that support him want to monopolize energy resources in the world. Because once they have that, they can impose their opinions, points of view, and policies on other nations and, of course, line their own pockets."
"President Bush said — vowed — he will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. You believe it?" Wallace asked.
"Basically we are not looking for — working for the bomb," the president said. "The problem that President Bush has is in his mind. He wants to solve everything with bombs. The time of the bomb is in the past. It's behind us. Today is the era of thought, dialogue and cultural exchanges.
"The Americans are overly sensitive. And, of course, the American government. I don't know why they're opposed to Iranian progress," the president said.
Asked if he really believed that the United States is against Iranian progress and development, President Ahmadinejad said, "That is true. That is what I am saying."
"Before the revolution, the German, French, and American governments and the Canadian government had signed contracts with us to produce nuclear fuel inside Iran. But immediately after the establishment of the Islamic Republic, their opposition started," he said. "Right now, they are opposed to our nuclear technology. Now why is that?"
"You are very good at filibustering," Wallace remarked. "You still have not answered the question. Israel must be wiped off the map. Why?"
"Well, don't be hasty sir," the president said. "I'm going to get to that. I think that the Israeli government is a fabricated government."
Last December, President Ahmadinejad said the Europeans had created a myth of the Holocaust.
"What I did say was, if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?" President Ahmadinejad replied.
"In Germany," Wallace said.
"Who caused this in Europe?" President Ahmadinejad asked.
"In Europe. So what you're suggesting then is that Israel should be over in Germany because that's where the holocaust took place?" Wallace asked.
"I'm not saying that, mind you," the president replied.
"If an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?" the president asked. "They had no role to play in this. Why on the pretext of the Holocaust they have occupied Palestine? Millions of people have been made refugees. Thousands of people to-date have been killed, sir. Thousands of people have been put in prison. Well, at the very moment, a great war is raging because of that."
"Look if you could keep your answers concise, we'll get more questions in," Wallace requested.
"Well, one of your questions required — all of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now," the president said.
"No, no, no, no, no," Wallace said.
"Do you, perhaps want me to say what you want me to say?" President Ahmadinejad said to Wallace.
"No, no," Wallace insisted.
"If that is the case, then I ask you to please be patient," the president replied. "Maybe these days you don't have a lot of patience to spare. Maybe these are words that you don't like to hear, Mr. Wallace."
"Why? What? What words do I not like to hear?" Wallace asked.
"Because I think that you're getting angry," President Ahmadinejad said.
"I couldn't be happier for the privilege of sitting down with the president of Iran," Wallace said.
"I am told that your revolutionary guards, Mr. President, are taking bombs — those roadside bombs — the IED's into Iraq. And what they are doing is furnishing the insurgents in Iraq with the kind of material that can kill U.S. soldiers. Why would you want to do that?" Wallace asked.
"Well, we are very saddened that the people of Iraq are being killed," President Ahmadinejad replied. "I believe that the rulers of the U.S. have to change their mentality. I ask you, sir, what is the American army doing inside Iraq? Iraq has a government, a parliament. Iraq is a civilized nation with a long history of civilization. These are people we're dealing with."
Asked if he thinks Saddam Hussein was a civilized, reasonable, leader and whether the United States was wrong about going into Iraq, President Ahmadinejad said: "Well, Saddam's story has been finished for close to three years, I would say. He belongs in the past. And the Americans are openly saying that 'We are here for the long run,' in Iraq that is. So, according to international law, the responsibility of providing security rests on the shoulder of the occupying power, rather army. So, I ask them why are they not providing security?"
Instead of security, he says the United States is oppressing Iraq.
"We are opposed to oppression," the president told Wallace. "We support whoever is victimized and oppressed, even the oppressed people of the U.S."
Asked what he thinks of Mr. Bush, President Ahmadinejad replied, "What do you think I should think about the gentlemen? How should I think about him?"
"Come on. You're perfectly capable of handling that question if you have the courage to answer it," Wallace said.
"Well, thank you very much. So, you're teaching me how to be bold and courageous," President Ahmadinejad said, laughing. "That's interesting."
"Answer the question," Wallace said.
"I think that Mr. Bush can be in the service of his own people," President Ahmadinejad said. "He can save the American economy using appropriate methodologies without killing people, innocents, without occupation, without threats. I am very saddened to hear that 1 percent of the total population is in prison. And 45 million people don't have a health care cover. That is very sad to hear."
And he was sad also not to hear any answer from President Bush to an 18-page letter he sent three months ago, urging him to be less bellicose in his view of the world. The White House dismissed the letter as a publicity stunt.
Asked what he expected to hear back from President Bush, President Ahmadinejad said: "I was expecting Mr. Bush to change his behavior. I was hoping to open a new window for the gentlemen. One can certainly look on the world from other perspectives. You can love the people. You can love all people. You can talk with the people of the Middle East using another language, other words. Instead of blind support for an imposed regime, they can establish a more appropriate relationship with the people of the region."
"You can love the people. That's very easy to say," Wallace remarked. "You despise certain people. You despise the Zionists."
"Well, I don't despise people or individuals, I should say," President Ahmadinejad said. "What I am saying is that I despise heinous actions."
"In the letter you praise Jesus and ask President Bush how he could be a follower of Christ and claim to support human rights but at the same time attack and occupy other countries, kill thousands of people, spend billions of dollars on wars. And you urged him, the president, out of respect for the teachings of Christ to be a force for peace instead of war. How is that so?" Wallace asked.
"That is true, it was a part of my letter," President Ahmadinejad acknowledged.
And then he had a new message for President Bush: "Please give him this message, sir. Those who refuse to accept an invitation to good, will not have a good ending or fate."
Asked what that means, President Ahmadinejad said: "Well, you see that his approval rating is dropping every day. Hatred vis-à-vis the president is increasing every day around the world. For a ruler, this is the worst message that he could receive. Rulers and heads of government at the end of their office must leave the office holding their heads high."
After President Ahmadinejad answered the question, an assistant handed the president a note. Asked what he was telling him, President Ahmadinejad said he had been told to rearrange his jacket.
"Why are they worried about your jacket? I think you look just fine," Wallace said, laughing.
"That is right. They have told me the same thing. They tell me that it's a very nice looking coat," President Ahmadinejad replied.
Asked if he is a vain man, President Ahmadinejad said, "Sometimes appearances — yes, you have to look your best… that is why I comb my hair."
"What do you do for leisure?" Wallace asked.
"I study. I read books. I exercise. And, of course, I spend some time — quality time — with my family," said President Ahmadinejad, who is a father of three.
"How long has it been since the leaders of Iran and the leaders of the U.S. have had any conversations?" Wallace asked.
"Twenty-six, 27 years," the president replied.
Asked if he has a desire to resume relations with the United States, President Ahmadinejad said, "Who cut the relations, I ask you."
"That's not the point. The question is would you, the president of Iran, like to resume relations which have been gone for 26, 27 years with the United States," Wallace pressed.
"Well, we are interested to have relations with all governments … and all nations. This is a principle of my foreign policy," President Ahmadinejad said.
"I know that," Wallace said.
"Allow me to finish myself," President Ahmadinejad said.
"Why don't you just answer, say yes or no?" Wallace asked. "Do you want to have relations now, after 26, 27 years, with the United States? What harm could come from that?"
"We are not talking about harm. The conditions, conducive conditions, have to be there," President Ahmadinejad said.
Asked what those "conducive conditions" are, the president said, "Well, please look at the makeup of the American administration, the behavior of the American administration. See how they talk down to my nation. They want to build an empire. And they don't want to live side by side in peace with other nations."
"Who does not? Washington does not?" Wallace asked.
"The American government, sir. It is very clear to me they have to change their behavior and everything will be resolved," President Ahmadinejad answered.
"I am told that your aides want us to wind up our interview. But you kindly promised to answer my questions," Wallace said. "And I still have just a few left."
"Well, you might have five more hours of questions now," President Ahmadinejad said. "Well, I have other appointments to get to. It's time for the night prayer, sir."
"Last one," Wallace said. "You have a special unit of martyr seekers in your revolutionary guard. They claim they have 52,000 trained suicide bombers ready to attack American and British targets if America should attack Iran."
"So, are you expecting the Americans to threaten us and we sit idly by and watch them with our hands tied?" President Ahmadinejad said.
Asked if the Americans have threatened him, President Ahmadinejad said: "I do hope that the Americans will give up this practice of threatening other nations so that you are not forced to ask such questions. I wish you well."
Source
full three-part video
"Very clearly, I will tell you that I fully oppose the behavior of the British and the Americans," President Ahmadinejad tells Wallace. "They are providing state-of-the-art military hardware to the Zionists. And they are throwing their full support behind Israel. We believe that this threatens the future of all peoples, including the American and European peoples. So we are asking why the American government is blindly supporting this murderous regime."
"The laser-guided bombs that have been given to the Zionists are targeting the shelters of defenseless children and women," the president said.
"Who supports Hezbollah?" Wallace asked. "Who has given Hezbollah hundreds of millions of dollars for years? Who has given Hezbollah Iranian-made missiles and rockets that are making all kinds …" he continued as he was interrupted.
"Are you the representative of the Zionist regime? Or a journalist?" President Ahmadinejad asked Wallace.
"I'm a journalist. I am a journalist," Wallace replied.
"This is not journalism, sir. Hezbollah is a popular organization in Lebanon, and they are defending their land," the president said. "They are defending their own houses. And, according to the charter of the United Nations, every person has the right to defend his house.
"What I'm saying is that the killing of innocents is reprehensible. And making this — the displacement of people and making them refugees, again, is reprehensible."
"Well, what has Hezbollah, though — wait a minute," Wallace asked. "Hezbollah is displacing and damaging and making bleed all kinds of people. You know that."
"Please tell me, are the Lebanese inside the occupied lands right now or is it the other way around, that the Zionist troops are in Lebanese territory?" President Ahmadinejad replied. "Lebanon is defending its independence. We are not at all happy with war. That is why on the first day we condemned the recent conflict. And we asked for an immediate ceasefire."
"The United Nations Security Council is there to safeguard the interests of the British and the Americans. They are not there to provide security. It's very clear," the president said.
"The UNSC, the United Nations Security Council, is there to protect the interests of the United States and the British. That's what you say?" Wallace asked.
"It has been created to help with peace and justice. But we see that it is not responding to atrocities. If we search for the root causes we see the hand of the British and the Americans," President Ahmadinejad said. "People, innocent people are being killed. … And houses are being destroyed. Where is the UNSC? Also, the draft resolution which has been circulated only serves the interests of one party. And it is not just."
And, he told Wallace, the Security Council is also doing America's bidding by trying to prevent Iran from developing nuclear energy. The Security Council is demanding that Iran stop all uranium enrichment by the end of this month.
"But if Mr. Bush thinks that he can stop our progress, I have to say that he will be unable to do that," President Ahmadinejad said.
"We want to have access to nuclear technology. We want to produce fuel. Do you not think that the most important issue of the world of tomorrow will be energy?
"We think that Mr. Bush's team and the parties that support him want to monopolize energy resources in the world. Because once they have that, they can impose their opinions, points of view, and policies on other nations and, of course, line their own pockets."
"President Bush said — vowed — he will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon. You believe it?" Wallace asked.
"Basically we are not looking for — working for the bomb," the president said. "The problem that President Bush has is in his mind. He wants to solve everything with bombs. The time of the bomb is in the past. It's behind us. Today is the era of thought, dialogue and cultural exchanges.
"The Americans are overly sensitive. And, of course, the American government. I don't know why they're opposed to Iranian progress," the president said.
Asked if he really believed that the United States is against Iranian progress and development, President Ahmadinejad said, "That is true. That is what I am saying."
"Before the revolution, the German, French, and American governments and the Canadian government had signed contracts with us to produce nuclear fuel inside Iran. But immediately after the establishment of the Islamic Republic, their opposition started," he said. "Right now, they are opposed to our nuclear technology. Now why is that?"
"You are very good at filibustering," Wallace remarked. "You still have not answered the question. Israel must be wiped off the map. Why?"
"Well, don't be hasty sir," the president said. "I'm going to get to that. I think that the Israeli government is a fabricated government."
Last December, President Ahmadinejad said the Europeans had created a myth of the Holocaust.
"What I did say was, if this is a reality, if this is real, where did it take place?" President Ahmadinejad replied.
"In Germany," Wallace said.
"Who caused this in Europe?" President Ahmadinejad asked.
"In Europe. So what you're suggesting then is that Israel should be over in Germany because that's where the holocaust took place?" Wallace asked.
"I'm not saying that, mind you," the president replied.
"If an atrocity was committed in Germany, or Europe for that matter, why should the Palestinians answer for this?" the president asked. "They had no role to play in this. Why on the pretext of the Holocaust they have occupied Palestine? Millions of people have been made refugees. Thousands of people to-date have been killed, sir. Thousands of people have been put in prison. Well, at the very moment, a great war is raging because of that."
"Look if you could keep your answers concise, we'll get more questions in," Wallace requested.
"Well, one of your questions required — all of your questions require a book-long answer. If you want me to just finish the interview, please tell me and we can wrap up right now," the president said.
"No, no, no, no, no," Wallace said.
"Do you, perhaps want me to say what you want me to say?" President Ahmadinejad said to Wallace.
"No, no," Wallace insisted.
"If that is the case, then I ask you to please be patient," the president replied. "Maybe these days you don't have a lot of patience to spare. Maybe these are words that you don't like to hear, Mr. Wallace."
"Why? What? What words do I not like to hear?" Wallace asked.
"Because I think that you're getting angry," President Ahmadinejad said.
"I couldn't be happier for the privilege of sitting down with the president of Iran," Wallace said.
"I am told that your revolutionary guards, Mr. President, are taking bombs — those roadside bombs — the IED's into Iraq. And what they are doing is furnishing the insurgents in Iraq with the kind of material that can kill U.S. soldiers. Why would you want to do that?" Wallace asked.
"Well, we are very saddened that the people of Iraq are being killed," President Ahmadinejad replied. "I believe that the rulers of the U.S. have to change their mentality. I ask you, sir, what is the American army doing inside Iraq? Iraq has a government, a parliament. Iraq is a civilized nation with a long history of civilization. These are people we're dealing with."
Asked if he thinks Saddam Hussein was a civilized, reasonable, leader and whether the United States was wrong about going into Iraq, President Ahmadinejad said: "Well, Saddam's story has been finished for close to three years, I would say. He belongs in the past. And the Americans are openly saying that 'We are here for the long run,' in Iraq that is. So, according to international law, the responsibility of providing security rests on the shoulder of the occupying power, rather army. So, I ask them why are they not providing security?"
Instead of security, he says the United States is oppressing Iraq.
"We are opposed to oppression," the president told Wallace. "We support whoever is victimized and oppressed, even the oppressed people of the U.S."
Asked what he thinks of Mr. Bush, President Ahmadinejad replied, "What do you think I should think about the gentlemen? How should I think about him?"
"Come on. You're perfectly capable of handling that question if you have the courage to answer it," Wallace said.
"Well, thank you very much. So, you're teaching me how to be bold and courageous," President Ahmadinejad said, laughing. "That's interesting."
"Answer the question," Wallace said.
"I think that Mr. Bush can be in the service of his own people," President Ahmadinejad said. "He can save the American economy using appropriate methodologies without killing people, innocents, without occupation, without threats. I am very saddened to hear that 1 percent of the total population is in prison. And 45 million people don't have a health care cover. That is very sad to hear."
And he was sad also not to hear any answer from President Bush to an 18-page letter he sent three months ago, urging him to be less bellicose in his view of the world. The White House dismissed the letter as a publicity stunt.
Asked what he expected to hear back from President Bush, President Ahmadinejad said: "I was expecting Mr. Bush to change his behavior. I was hoping to open a new window for the gentlemen. One can certainly look on the world from other perspectives. You can love the people. You can love all people. You can talk with the people of the Middle East using another language, other words. Instead of blind support for an imposed regime, they can establish a more appropriate relationship with the people of the region."
"You can love the people. That's very easy to say," Wallace remarked. "You despise certain people. You despise the Zionists."
"Well, I don't despise people or individuals, I should say," President Ahmadinejad said. "What I am saying is that I despise heinous actions."
"In the letter you praise Jesus and ask President Bush how he could be a follower of Christ and claim to support human rights but at the same time attack and occupy other countries, kill thousands of people, spend billions of dollars on wars. And you urged him, the president, out of respect for the teachings of Christ to be a force for peace instead of war. How is that so?" Wallace asked.
"That is true, it was a part of my letter," President Ahmadinejad acknowledged.
And then he had a new message for President Bush: "Please give him this message, sir. Those who refuse to accept an invitation to good, will not have a good ending or fate."
Asked what that means, President Ahmadinejad said: "Well, you see that his approval rating is dropping every day. Hatred vis-à-vis the president is increasing every day around the world. For a ruler, this is the worst message that he could receive. Rulers and heads of government at the end of their office must leave the office holding their heads high."
After President Ahmadinejad answered the question, an assistant handed the president a note. Asked what he was telling him, President Ahmadinejad said he had been told to rearrange his jacket.
"Why are they worried about your jacket? I think you look just fine," Wallace said, laughing.
"That is right. They have told me the same thing. They tell me that it's a very nice looking coat," President Ahmadinejad replied.
Asked if he is a vain man, President Ahmadinejad said, "Sometimes appearances — yes, you have to look your best… that is why I comb my hair."
"What do you do for leisure?" Wallace asked.
"I study. I read books. I exercise. And, of course, I spend some time — quality time — with my family," said President Ahmadinejad, who is a father of three.
"How long has it been since the leaders of Iran and the leaders of the U.S. have had any conversations?" Wallace asked.
"Twenty-six, 27 years," the president replied.
Asked if he has a desire to resume relations with the United States, President Ahmadinejad said, "Who cut the relations, I ask you."
"That's not the point. The question is would you, the president of Iran, like to resume relations which have been gone for 26, 27 years with the United States," Wallace pressed.
"Well, we are interested to have relations with all governments … and all nations. This is a principle of my foreign policy," President Ahmadinejad said.
"I know that," Wallace said.
"Allow me to finish myself," President Ahmadinejad said.
"Why don't you just answer, say yes or no?" Wallace asked. "Do you want to have relations now, after 26, 27 years, with the United States? What harm could come from that?"
"We are not talking about harm. The conditions, conducive conditions, have to be there," President Ahmadinejad said.
Asked what those "conducive conditions" are, the president said, "Well, please look at the makeup of the American administration, the behavior of the American administration. See how they talk down to my nation. They want to build an empire. And they don't want to live side by side in peace with other nations."
"Who does not? Washington does not?" Wallace asked.
"The American government, sir. It is very clear to me they have to change their behavior and everything will be resolved," President Ahmadinejad answered.
"I am told that your aides want us to wind up our interview. But you kindly promised to answer my questions," Wallace said. "And I still have just a few left."
"Well, you might have five more hours of questions now," President Ahmadinejad said. "Well, I have other appointments to get to. It's time for the night prayer, sir."
"Last one," Wallace said. "You have a special unit of martyr seekers in your revolutionary guard. They claim they have 52,000 trained suicide bombers ready to attack American and British targets if America should attack Iran."
"So, are you expecting the Americans to threaten us and we sit idly by and watch them with our hands tied?" President Ahmadinejad said.
Asked if the Americans have threatened him, President Ahmadinejad said: "I do hope that the Americans will give up this practice of threatening other nations so that you are not forced to ask such questions. I wish you well."
Source
full three-part video
May 30, 2006
Interview with Spiegel Magazine
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, you are a soccer fan and you like to play soccer. Will you be sitting in the stadium in Nuremberg on June 11, when the Iranian national team plays against Mexico in Germany?
Ahmadinejad: It depends. Naturally, I'll be watching the game in any case. I don't know yet whether I'll be at home in front of the television set or somewhere else. My decision depends upon a number of things.
SPIEGEL: For example?
Ahmadinejad: How much time I have, how the state of various relationships are going, whether I feel like it and a number of other things.
SPIEGEL: There was great indignation in Germany when it became known that you might be coming to the soccer world championship. Did that surprise you?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not important. I didn't even understand how that came about. It also had no meaning for me. I don't know what all the excitement is about.
SPIEGEL: It concerned your remarks about the Holocaust. It was inevitable that the Iranian president's denial of the systematic murder of the Jews by the Germans would trigger outrage.
Ahmadinejad: I don't exactly understand the connection.
SPIEGEL: First you make your remarks about the Holocaust. Then comes the news that you may travel to Germany -- this causes an uproar. So you were surprised after all?
Ahmadinejad: No, not at all, because the network of Zionism is very active around the world, in Europe too. So I wasn't surprised. We were addressing the German people. We have nothing to do with Zionists.
SPIEGEL: Denying the Holocaust is punishable in Germany. Are you indifferent when confronted with so much outrage?
Ahmadinejad: I know that DER SPIEGEL is a respected magazine. But I don't know whether it is possible for you to publish the truth about the Holocaust. Are you permitted to write everything about it?
SPIEGEL: Of course we are entitled to write about the findings of the past 60 years' historical research. In our view there is no doubt that the Germans -- unfortunately -- bear the guilt for the murder of 6 million Jews.
Ahmadinejad: Well, then we have stirred up a very concrete discussion. We are posing two very clear questions. The first is: Did the Holocaust actually take place? You answer this question in the affirmative. So, the second question is: Whose fault was it? The answer to that has to be found in Europe and not in Palestine. It is perfectly clear: If the Holocaust took place in Europe, one also has to find the answer to it in Europe.
On the other hand, if the Holocaust didn't take place, why then did this regime of occupation ...
SPIEGEL: ... You mean the state of Israel...
Ahmadinejad: ... come about? Why do the European countries commit themselves to defending this regime? Permit me to make one more point. We are of the opinion that, if an historical occurrence conforms to the truth, this truth will be revealed all the more clearly if there is more research into it and more discussion about it.
SPIEGEL: That has long since happened in Germany.
Ahmadinejad: We don't want to confirm or deny the Holocaust. We oppose every type of crime against any people. But we want to know whether this crime actually took place or not. If it did, then those who bear the responsibility for it have to be punished, and not the Palestinians. Why isn't research into a deed that occurred 60 years ago permitted? After all, other historical occurrences, some of which lie several thousand years in the past, are open to research, and even the governments support this.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, with all due respect, the Holocaust occurred, there were concentration camps, there are dossiers on the extermination of the Jews, there has been a great deal of research, and there is neither the slightest doubt about the Holocaust nor about the fact - we greatly regret this - that the Germans are responsible for it. If we may now add one remark: the fate of the Palestinians is an entirely different issue, and this brings us into the present.
Ahmadinejad: No, no, the roots of the Palestinian conflict must be sought in history. The Holocaust and Palestine are directly connected with one another. And if the Holocaust actually occurred, then you should permit impartial groups from the whole world to research this. Why do you restrict the research to a certain group? Of course, I don't mean you, but rather the European governments.
SPIEGEL: Are you still saying that the Holocaust is just "a myth?"
Ahmadinejad: I will only accept something as truth if I am actually convinced of it.
SPIEGEL: Even though no Western scholars harbor any doubt about the Holocaust?
Ahmadinejad: But there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part. Hence, an impartial group has to come together to investigate and to render an opinion on this very important subject, because the clarification of this issue will contribute to the solution of global problems. Under the pretext of the Holocaust, a very strong polarization has taken place in the world and fronts have been formed. It would therefore be very good if an international and impartial group looked into the matter in order to clarify it once and for all. Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.
SPIEGEL: Who is that supposed to be? Which researchers do you mean?
Ahmadinejad: You would know this better than I; you have the list. There are people from England, from Germany, France and from Australia.
SPIEGEL: You presumably mean, for example, the Englishman David Irving, the German-Canadian Ernst Zündel, who is on trial in Mannheim, and the Frenchman Georges Theil, all of whom deny the Holocaust.
Ahmadinejad: The mere fact that my comments have caused such strong protests, although I'm not a European, and also the fact that I have been compared with certain persons in German history indicates how charged with conflict the atmosphere for research is in your country. Here in Iran you needn't worry.
SPIEGEL: Well, we are conducting this historical debate with you for a very timely purpose. Are you questioning Israel's right to exist?
Ahmadinejad: Look here, my views are quite clear. We are saying that if the Holocaust occurred, then Europe must draw the consequences and that it is not Palestine that should pay the price for it. If it did not occur, then the Jews have to go back to where they came from. I believe that the German people today are also prisoners of the Holocaust. Sixty million people died in the Second World War. World War II was a gigantic crime. We condemn it all. We are against bloodshed, regardless of whether a crime was committed against a Muslim or against a Christian or a Jew. But the question is: Why among these 60 million victims are only the Jews the center of attention?
SPIEGEL: That's just not the case. All peoples mourn the victims claimed by the Second World War, Germans and Russians and Poles and others as well. Yet, we as Germans cannot absolve ourselves of a special guilt, namely for the systematic murder of the Jews. But perhaps we should now move on to the next subject.
Ahmadinejad: No, I have a question for you. What kind of a role did today's youth play in World War II?
SPIEGEL: None.
Ahmadinejad: Why should they have feelings of guilt toward Zionists? Why should the costs of the Zionists be paid out of their pockets? If people committed crimes in the past, then they would have to have been tried 60 years ago. End of story! Why must the German people be humiliated today because a group of people committed crimes in the name of the Germans during the course of history?
SPIEGEL: The German people today can't do anything about it. But there is a sort of collective shame for those deeds done in the German name by our fathers or grandfathers.
Ahmadinejad: How can a person who wasn't even alive at the time be held legally responsible?
SPIEGEL: Not legally but morally.
Ahmadinejad: Why is such a burden heaped on the German people? The German people of today bear no guilt. Why are the German people not permitted the right to defend themselves? Why are the crimes of one group emphasized so greatly, instead of highlighting the great German cultural heritage? Why should the Germans not have the right to express their opinion freely?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we are well aware that German history is not made up of only the 12 years of the Third Reich. Nevertheless, we have to accept that horrible crimes have been committed in the German name. We also own up to this, and it is a great achievement of the Germans in post-war history that they have grappled critically with their past.
Ahmadinejad: Are you also prepared to tell that to the German people?
SPIEGEL: Oh yes, we do that.
Ahmadinejad: Then would you also permit an impartial group to ask the German people whether it shares your opinion? No people accepts its own humiliation.
SPIEGEL: All questions are allowed in our country. But of course there are right-wing radicals in Germany who are not only anti-Semitic, but xenophobic as well, and we do indeed consider them a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Let me ask you one thing: How much longer can this go on? How much longer do you think the German people have to accept being taken hostage by the Zionists? When will that end - in 20, 50, 1,000 years?
SPIEGEL: We can only speak for ourselves. DER SPIEGEL is nobody's hostage; SPIEGEL does not deal only with Germany's past and the Germans' crimes. We're not Israel's uncritical ally in the Palestian conflict. But we want to make one thing very clear: We are critical, we are independent, but we won't simply stand by without protest when the existential right of the state of Israel, where many Holocaust survivors live, is being questioned.
Ahmadinejad: Precisely that is our point. Why should you feel obliged to the Zionists? If there really had been a Holocaust, Israel ought to be located in Europe, not in Palestine.
SPIEGEL: Do you want to resettle a whole people 60 years after the end of the war?
Ahmadinejad: Five million Palestinians have not had a home for 60 years. It is amazing really: You have been paying reparations for the Holocaust for 60 years and will have to keep paying up for another 100 years. Why then is the fate of the Palestinians no issue here?
SPIEGEL: The Europeans support the Palestinians in many ways. After all, we also have an historic responsibility to help bring peace to this region finally. But don't you share that responsibility?
Ahmadinejad: Yes, but aggression, occupation and a repetition of the Holocaust won't bring peace. What we want is a sustainable peace. This means that we have to tackle the root of the problem. I am pleased to note that you are honest people and admit that you are obliged to support the Zionists.
SPIEGEL: That's not what we said, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: You said Israelis.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we're talking about the Holocaust because we want to talk about the possible nuclear armament of Iran -- which is why the West sees you as a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Some groups in the West enjoy calling things or people a threat. Of course you're free to make your own judgment.
SPIEGEL: The key question is: Do you want nuclear weapons for your country?
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to encourage a discussion on the following question: How long do you think the world can be governed by the rhetoric of a handful of Western powers? Whenever they hold something against someone, they start spreading propaganda and lies, defamation and blackmail. How much longer can that go on?
SPIEGEL: We're here to find out the truth. The head of state of a neighboring country, for example, told SPIEGEL: "They are very keen on building the bomb." Is that true?
Ahmadinejad: You see, we conduct our discussions with you and the European governments on an entirely different, higher level. In our view, the legal system whereby a handful of countries force their will on the rest of the world is discriminatory and unstable. One-hundred and thirty-nine countries, including us, are members of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) in Vienna. Both the statutes of IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as well as all security agreements grant the member countries the right to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. That is the legitimate legal right of any people. Beyond this, however, IAEA was also established to promote the disarmament of those powers that already possessed nuclear weapons. And now look at what's happening today: Iran has had an excellent cooperation with IAEA. We have had more than 2,000 inspections of our plants, and the inspectors have obtained more than 1,000 pages of documentation from us. Their cameras are installed in our nuclear centers. IAEA has emphasized in all its reports that there are no indications of any irregularities in Iran. That is one side of this matter.
SPIEGEL: IAEA doesn't quite share your view of this matter.
Ahmadinejad: But the other side is that there are a number of countries that possess both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. They use their atomic weapons to threaten other peoples. And it is these powers who say that they are worried about Iran deviating from the path of peaceful use of atomic energy. We say that these powers are free to monitor us if they are worried. But what these powers say is that the Iranians must not complete the nuclear fuel cycle because deviation from peaceful use might then be possible. What we say is that these countries themselves have long deviated from peaceful usage. These powers have no right to talk to us in this manner. This order is unjust and unsustainable.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, the key question is: How dangerous will this world become if even more countries become nuclear powers -- if a country like Iran, whose president makes threats, builds the bomb in a crisis-ridden region?
Ahmadinejad: We're fundamentally opposed to the expansion of nuclear-weapons arsenals. This is why we have proposed the formation of an unbiased organization and the disarmament of the nuclear powers. We don't need any weapons. We're a civilized, cultured people, and our history shows that we have never attacked another country.
SPIEGEL: Iran doesn't need the bomb that it wants to build?
Ahmadinejad: It's interesting to note that European nations wanted to allow the shah's dictatorship the use of nuclear technology. That was a dangerous regime. Yet those nations were willing to supply it with nuclear technology. Ever since the Islamic Republic has existed, however, these powers have been opposed to it. I stress once again, we don't need any nuclear weapons.
We stand by our statements because we're honest and act legally. We're no fraudsters. We only want to claim our legitimate right. Incidentally, I never threatened anyone - that, too, is part of the propaganda machine that you've got running against me.
SPIEGEL: If this were so, shouldn't you be making an effort to ensure that no one need fear your producing nuclear weapons that you might use against Israel, thus possibly unleashing a world war? You're sitting on a tinderbox, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to say two things. No people in the region are afraid of us. And no one should instill fear in these peoples. We believe that if the United States and these two or three European countries did not interfere, the peoples in this region would live peacefully together as they did in the thousands of years before. In 1980, it was also the nations of Europe and the United States that encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack us.
Our stance with respect to Palestine is clear. We say: Allow those to whom this country belongs to express their opinion. Let Jews, Christians and Muslims say what they think. The opponents of this proposal prefer war and threaten the region. Why are the United States and these two or three European nations opposed to this? I believe that those who imprison Holocaust researchers prefer war to peace. Our stance is democratic and peaceful.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have long gone a step further than you and recognize Israel as a fact, while you still wish to erase it from the map. The Palestinians are ready to accept a two-state solution while you deny Israel its right to existence.
Ahmadinejad: You're wrong. You saw that the Palestinian people elected Hamas in free elections. We argue that neither you nor we should claim to speak for the Palestinian people. The Palestinians themselves should say what they want. In Europe it is customary to call a referendum on any issue. We should also give the Palestinians the opportunity to express their opinion.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have the right to their own state, but in our view the Israelis naturally have the same right.
Ahmadinejad: Where did the Israelis come from?
SPIEGEL: Well, if we tried to work out where people have come from, the Europeans would have to return to east Africa where all humans originated.
Ahmadinejad: We're not talking about the Europeans; we're talking about the Palestinians. The Palestinians were there, in Palestine. Now 5 million of them have become refugees. Don't they have a right to live?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, doesn't there come a time when one should accept that the world is the way it is and that we must accept the status quo? The war against Iraq has put Iran in a favorable position. The United States has suffered a de facto defeat in Iraq. Isn't it now time for Iran to become a constructive power of peace in the Middle East? Which would mean giving up its nuclear plans and inflammatory talk?
Ahmadinejad: I'm wondering why you're adopting and fanatically defending the stance of the European politicians. You're a magazine, not a government. Saying that we should accept the world as it is would mean that the winners of World War II would remain the victorious powers for another 1,000 years and that the German people would be humiliated for another 1,000 years. Do you think that is the correct logic?
SPIEGEL: No, that's not the right logic, nor is it true. The Germans have played a modest, but important role in post-war developments. They do not feel as though they have been humiliated and dishonored since 1945. We are too self-confident for that. But today we want to talk about Iran's current mission.
Ahmadinejad: Then we would accept that Palestinians are killed every day, that they die in terrorist attacks, and that houses are being destroyed. But let me say something about Iraq. We have always favored peace and security in the region. For eight years, the Western countries provided arms to Saddam in the war against us, including chemical weapons, and gave him political support. We were against Saddam and suffered severely because of him, so we're happy that he has been toppled. But we don't accept a whole country being swallowed under the pretext of wanting to topple Saddam. More than 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives under the rule of the occupying forces. Fortunately, the Germans haven't been involved in this. We want security in Iraq.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, who is swallowing Iraq? The United States has practically lost this war. By cooperating constructively, Iran might help the Americans consider their retreat from the country.
Ahmadinejad: This is very interesting: The Americans occupy the country, kill people, sell the oil and when they have lost, they blame others. We have very close ties to the Iraqi people. Many people on both sides of the border are related. We have lived side by side for thousands of years. Our holy pilgrimage sites are located in Iraq. Just like Iran, Iraq used to be a center of civilization.
SPIEGEL: What are you trying to say?
Ahmadinejad: We have always said that we support the popularly elected government of Iraq. But in my view the Americans are doing a bad job. They have sent us messages several times asking us for help and cooperation. They have said that we should talk together about Iraq. We publicly accepted this offer, although our people do not trust the Americans. But America has responded negatively and insulted us. Even now we're contributing to security in Iraq. We will hold talks only if the Americans change their behavior.
SPIEGEL: Do you enjoy provoking the Americans and the rest of the world now and then?
Ahmadinejad: No, I'm not insulting anyone. The letter that I wrote to Mr. Bush was polite.
SPIEGEL: We don't mean insult, but provoke.
Ahmadinejad: No, we feel animosity toward no one. We're concerned about the American soldiers who die in Iraq. Why do they have to die there? This war makes no sense. Why is there war when there is reason as well?
SPIEGEL: Is your letter to the president also a gesture toward the Americans that you wish to enter into direct negotiations?
Ahmadinejad: We clearly stated our position in this letter on how we view the problems in the world. Some powers have befouled the political atmosphere in the world because they consider lies and fraud to be legitimate. In our view that is very bad. We believe that all people deserve respect. Relationships have to be regulated on the basis of justice. When justice reigns, peace reigns. Unjust conditions aren't sustainable, even if Ahmadinejad does not criticize them.
SPIEGEL: This letter to the American president includes a passage about Sept. 11, 2001. The quote: "How could such an operation be planned and implemented without the coordination with secret and security services or without the far-reaching infiltration of these services?" Your statements always include so many innuendos. What is that supposed to mean? Did the CIA help Mohammed Atta and the other 18 terrorists conduct their attacks?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not what I meant. We think that they should just say who is to blame. They should not use Sept. 11 as an excuse to launch a military attack against the Middle East. They should take those who are responsible for the attacks to court. We're not opposed to that; we condemned the attacks. We condemn any attack against innocent people.
SPIEGEL: In this letter you also write that Western liberalism has failed. What makes you say that?
Ahmadinejad: You see, for example you have a thousand definitions of the Palestinian problem and you offer all sorts of different definitions of democracy in its various forms. It does not make sense that a phenomenon depends on the opinions of many individuals who are free to interpret the phenomenon as they wish. You can't solve the problems of the world that way. We need a new approach. Of course we want the free will of the people to reign, but we need sustainable principles that enjoy universal acceptance - such as justice. Iran and the West agree on this.
SPIEGEL: What role can Europe play in the resolution of the nuclear conflict, and what do you expect of Germany?
Ahmadinejad: We have always cultivated good relations with Europe, especially with Germany. Our two peoples like each other. We're eager to deepen this relationship.
Europe has made three mistakes with respect to our people. The first mistake was to support the Shah's government. This has left our people disappointed and discontent. However, by offering asylum to Imam Khomeini, France earned a special position that it lost again later. The second mistake was to support Saddam in his war against us. The truth is that our people expected Europe to be on our side, not against us. The third mistake was Europe's stance on the nuclear issue. Europe will be the big loser and will achieve nothing. We don't want to see that happen.
SPIEGEL: What will happen now in the conflict between the West and Iran?
Ahmadinejad: We understand the Americans' logic. They suffered damage as a result of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. But we're puzzled why some European countries are opposed to us. I sent out a message on the nuclear issue, asking why the Europeans were translating the Americans' words for us. After all, they know that our actions are aimed toward peace. By siding with Iran, the Europeans would serve their own and our interests. But they will suffer only damage if they oppose us. For our people is strong and determined.
The Europeans risk losing their position in the Middle East entirely, and they are ruining their reputation in other parts of the world. The others will think that the Europeans aren't capable of solving problems.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we thank you for this interview.
Source
Ahmadinejad: It depends. Naturally, I'll be watching the game in any case. I don't know yet whether I'll be at home in front of the television set or somewhere else. My decision depends upon a number of things.
SPIEGEL: For example?
Ahmadinejad: How much time I have, how the state of various relationships are going, whether I feel like it and a number of other things.
SPIEGEL: There was great indignation in Germany when it became known that you might be coming to the soccer world championship. Did that surprise you?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not important. I didn't even understand how that came about. It also had no meaning for me. I don't know what all the excitement is about.
SPIEGEL: It concerned your remarks about the Holocaust. It was inevitable that the Iranian president's denial of the systematic murder of the Jews by the Germans would trigger outrage.
Ahmadinejad: I don't exactly understand the connection.
SPIEGEL: First you make your remarks about the Holocaust. Then comes the news that you may travel to Germany -- this causes an uproar. So you were surprised after all?
Ahmadinejad: No, not at all, because the network of Zionism is very active around the world, in Europe too. So I wasn't surprised. We were addressing the German people. We have nothing to do with Zionists.
SPIEGEL: Denying the Holocaust is punishable in Germany. Are you indifferent when confronted with so much outrage?
Ahmadinejad: I know that DER SPIEGEL is a respected magazine. But I don't know whether it is possible for you to publish the truth about the Holocaust. Are you permitted to write everything about it?
SPIEGEL: Of course we are entitled to write about the findings of the past 60 years' historical research. In our view there is no doubt that the Germans -- unfortunately -- bear the guilt for the murder of 6 million Jews.
Ahmadinejad: Well, then we have stirred up a very concrete discussion. We are posing two very clear questions. The first is: Did the Holocaust actually take place? You answer this question in the affirmative. So, the second question is: Whose fault was it? The answer to that has to be found in Europe and not in Palestine. It is perfectly clear: If the Holocaust took place in Europe, one also has to find the answer to it in Europe.
On the other hand, if the Holocaust didn't take place, why then did this regime of occupation ...
SPIEGEL: ... You mean the state of Israel...
Ahmadinejad: ... come about? Why do the European countries commit themselves to defending this regime? Permit me to make one more point. We are of the opinion that, if an historical occurrence conforms to the truth, this truth will be revealed all the more clearly if there is more research into it and more discussion about it.
SPIEGEL: That has long since happened in Germany.
Ahmadinejad: We don't want to confirm or deny the Holocaust. We oppose every type of crime against any people. But we want to know whether this crime actually took place or not. If it did, then those who bear the responsibility for it have to be punished, and not the Palestinians. Why isn't research into a deed that occurred 60 years ago permitted? After all, other historical occurrences, some of which lie several thousand years in the past, are open to research, and even the governments support this.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, with all due respect, the Holocaust occurred, there were concentration camps, there are dossiers on the extermination of the Jews, there has been a great deal of research, and there is neither the slightest doubt about the Holocaust nor about the fact - we greatly regret this - that the Germans are responsible for it. If we may now add one remark: the fate of the Palestinians is an entirely different issue, and this brings us into the present.
Ahmadinejad: No, no, the roots of the Palestinian conflict must be sought in history. The Holocaust and Palestine are directly connected with one another. And if the Holocaust actually occurred, then you should permit impartial groups from the whole world to research this. Why do you restrict the research to a certain group? Of course, I don't mean you, but rather the European governments.
SPIEGEL: Are you still saying that the Holocaust is just "a myth?"
Ahmadinejad: I will only accept something as truth if I am actually convinced of it.
SPIEGEL: Even though no Western scholars harbor any doubt about the Holocaust?
Ahmadinejad: But there are two opinions on this in Europe. One group of scholars or persons, most of them politically motivated, say the Holocaust occurred. Then there is the group of scholars who represent the opposite position and have therefore been imprisoned for the most part. Hence, an impartial group has to come together to investigate and to render an opinion on this very important subject, because the clarification of this issue will contribute to the solution of global problems. Under the pretext of the Holocaust, a very strong polarization has taken place in the world and fronts have been formed. It would therefore be very good if an international and impartial group looked into the matter in order to clarify it once and for all. Normally, governments promote and support the work of researchers on historical events and do not put them in prison.
SPIEGEL: Who is that supposed to be? Which researchers do you mean?
Ahmadinejad: You would know this better than I; you have the list. There are people from England, from Germany, France and from Australia.
SPIEGEL: You presumably mean, for example, the Englishman David Irving, the German-Canadian Ernst Zündel, who is on trial in Mannheim, and the Frenchman Georges Theil, all of whom deny the Holocaust.
Ahmadinejad: The mere fact that my comments have caused such strong protests, although I'm not a European, and also the fact that I have been compared with certain persons in German history indicates how charged with conflict the atmosphere for research is in your country. Here in Iran you needn't worry.
SPIEGEL: Well, we are conducting this historical debate with you for a very timely purpose. Are you questioning Israel's right to exist?
Ahmadinejad: Look here, my views are quite clear. We are saying that if the Holocaust occurred, then Europe must draw the consequences and that it is not Palestine that should pay the price for it. If it did not occur, then the Jews have to go back to where they came from. I believe that the German people today are also prisoners of the Holocaust. Sixty million people died in the Second World War. World War II was a gigantic crime. We condemn it all. We are against bloodshed, regardless of whether a crime was committed against a Muslim or against a Christian or a Jew. But the question is: Why among these 60 million victims are only the Jews the center of attention?
SPIEGEL: That's just not the case. All peoples mourn the victims claimed by the Second World War, Germans and Russians and Poles and others as well. Yet, we as Germans cannot absolve ourselves of a special guilt, namely for the systematic murder of the Jews. But perhaps we should now move on to the next subject.
Ahmadinejad: No, I have a question for you. What kind of a role did today's youth play in World War II?
SPIEGEL: None.
Ahmadinejad: Why should they have feelings of guilt toward Zionists? Why should the costs of the Zionists be paid out of their pockets? If people committed crimes in the past, then they would have to have been tried 60 years ago. End of story! Why must the German people be humiliated today because a group of people committed crimes in the name of the Germans during the course of history?
SPIEGEL: The German people today can't do anything about it. But there is a sort of collective shame for those deeds done in the German name by our fathers or grandfathers.
Ahmadinejad: How can a person who wasn't even alive at the time be held legally responsible?
SPIEGEL: Not legally but morally.
Ahmadinejad: Why is such a burden heaped on the German people? The German people of today bear no guilt. Why are the German people not permitted the right to defend themselves? Why are the crimes of one group emphasized so greatly, instead of highlighting the great German cultural heritage? Why should the Germans not have the right to express their opinion freely?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we are well aware that German history is not made up of only the 12 years of the Third Reich. Nevertheless, we have to accept that horrible crimes have been committed in the German name. We also own up to this, and it is a great achievement of the Germans in post-war history that they have grappled critically with their past.
Ahmadinejad: Are you also prepared to tell that to the German people?
SPIEGEL: Oh yes, we do that.
Ahmadinejad: Then would you also permit an impartial group to ask the German people whether it shares your opinion? No people accepts its own humiliation.
SPIEGEL: All questions are allowed in our country. But of course there are right-wing radicals in Germany who are not only anti-Semitic, but xenophobic as well, and we do indeed consider them a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Let me ask you one thing: How much longer can this go on? How much longer do you think the German people have to accept being taken hostage by the Zionists? When will that end - in 20, 50, 1,000 years?
SPIEGEL: We can only speak for ourselves. DER SPIEGEL is nobody's hostage; SPIEGEL does not deal only with Germany's past and the Germans' crimes. We're not Israel's uncritical ally in the Palestian conflict. But we want to make one thing very clear: We are critical, we are independent, but we won't simply stand by without protest when the existential right of the state of Israel, where many Holocaust survivors live, is being questioned.
Ahmadinejad: Precisely that is our point. Why should you feel obliged to the Zionists? If there really had been a Holocaust, Israel ought to be located in Europe, not in Palestine.
SPIEGEL: Do you want to resettle a whole people 60 years after the end of the war?
Ahmadinejad: Five million Palestinians have not had a home for 60 years. It is amazing really: You have been paying reparations for the Holocaust for 60 years and will have to keep paying up for another 100 years. Why then is the fate of the Palestinians no issue here?
SPIEGEL: The Europeans support the Palestinians in many ways. After all, we also have an historic responsibility to help bring peace to this region finally. But don't you share that responsibility?
Ahmadinejad: Yes, but aggression, occupation and a repetition of the Holocaust won't bring peace. What we want is a sustainable peace. This means that we have to tackle the root of the problem. I am pleased to note that you are honest people and admit that you are obliged to support the Zionists.
SPIEGEL: That's not what we said, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: You said Israelis.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we're talking about the Holocaust because we want to talk about the possible nuclear armament of Iran -- which is why the West sees you as a threat.
Ahmadinejad: Some groups in the West enjoy calling things or people a threat. Of course you're free to make your own judgment.
SPIEGEL: The key question is: Do you want nuclear weapons for your country?
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to encourage a discussion on the following question: How long do you think the world can be governed by the rhetoric of a handful of Western powers? Whenever they hold something against someone, they start spreading propaganda and lies, defamation and blackmail. How much longer can that go on?
SPIEGEL: We're here to find out the truth. The head of state of a neighboring country, for example, told SPIEGEL: "They are very keen on building the bomb." Is that true?
Ahmadinejad: You see, we conduct our discussions with you and the European governments on an entirely different, higher level. In our view, the legal system whereby a handful of countries force their will on the rest of the world is discriminatory and unstable. One-hundred and thirty-nine countries, including us, are members of the International Atomic Energy Authority (IAEA) in Vienna. Both the statutes of IAEA and the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as well as all security agreements grant the member countries the right to produce nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes. That is the legitimate legal right of any people. Beyond this, however, IAEA was also established to promote the disarmament of those powers that already possessed nuclear weapons. And now look at what's happening today: Iran has had an excellent cooperation with IAEA. We have had more than 2,000 inspections of our plants, and the inspectors have obtained more than 1,000 pages of documentation from us. Their cameras are installed in our nuclear centers. IAEA has emphasized in all its reports that there are no indications of any irregularities in Iran. That is one side of this matter.
SPIEGEL: IAEA doesn't quite share your view of this matter.
Ahmadinejad: But the other side is that there are a number of countries that possess both nuclear energy and nuclear weapons. They use their atomic weapons to threaten other peoples. And it is these powers who say that they are worried about Iran deviating from the path of peaceful use of atomic energy. We say that these powers are free to monitor us if they are worried. But what these powers say is that the Iranians must not complete the nuclear fuel cycle because deviation from peaceful use might then be possible. What we say is that these countries themselves have long deviated from peaceful usage. These powers have no right to talk to us in this manner. This order is unjust and unsustainable.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, the key question is: How dangerous will this world become if even more countries become nuclear powers -- if a country like Iran, whose president makes threats, builds the bomb in a crisis-ridden region?
Ahmadinejad: We're fundamentally opposed to the expansion of nuclear-weapons arsenals. This is why we have proposed the formation of an unbiased organization and the disarmament of the nuclear powers. We don't need any weapons. We're a civilized, cultured people, and our history shows that we have never attacked another country.
SPIEGEL: Iran doesn't need the bomb that it wants to build?
Ahmadinejad: It's interesting to note that European nations wanted to allow the shah's dictatorship the use of nuclear technology. That was a dangerous regime. Yet those nations were willing to supply it with nuclear technology. Ever since the Islamic Republic has existed, however, these powers have been opposed to it. I stress once again, we don't need any nuclear weapons.
We stand by our statements because we're honest and act legally. We're no fraudsters. We only want to claim our legitimate right. Incidentally, I never threatened anyone - that, too, is part of the propaganda machine that you've got running against me.
SPIEGEL: If this were so, shouldn't you be making an effort to ensure that no one need fear your producing nuclear weapons that you might use against Israel, thus possibly unleashing a world war? You're sitting on a tinderbox, Mr. President.
Ahmadinejad: Allow me to say two things. No people in the region are afraid of us. And no one should instill fear in these peoples. We believe that if the United States and these two or three European countries did not interfere, the peoples in this region would live peacefully together as they did in the thousands of years before. In 1980, it was also the nations of Europe and the United States that encouraged Saddam Hussein to attack us.
Our stance with respect to Palestine is clear. We say: Allow those to whom this country belongs to express their opinion. Let Jews, Christians and Muslims say what they think. The opponents of this proposal prefer war and threaten the region. Why are the United States and these two or three European nations opposed to this? I believe that those who imprison Holocaust researchers prefer war to peace. Our stance is democratic and peaceful.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have long gone a step further than you and recognize Israel as a fact, while you still wish to erase it from the map. The Palestinians are ready to accept a two-state solution while you deny Israel its right to existence.
Ahmadinejad: You're wrong. You saw that the Palestinian people elected Hamas in free elections. We argue that neither you nor we should claim to speak for the Palestinian people. The Palestinians themselves should say what they want. In Europe it is customary to call a referendum on any issue. We should also give the Palestinians the opportunity to express their opinion.
SPIEGEL: The Palestinians have the right to their own state, but in our view the Israelis naturally have the same right.
Ahmadinejad: Where did the Israelis come from?
SPIEGEL: Well, if we tried to work out where people have come from, the Europeans would have to return to east Africa where all humans originated.
Ahmadinejad: We're not talking about the Europeans; we're talking about the Palestinians. The Palestinians were there, in Palestine. Now 5 million of them have become refugees. Don't they have a right to live?
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, doesn't there come a time when one should accept that the world is the way it is and that we must accept the status quo? The war against Iraq has put Iran in a favorable position. The United States has suffered a de facto defeat in Iraq. Isn't it now time for Iran to become a constructive power of peace in the Middle East? Which would mean giving up its nuclear plans and inflammatory talk?
Ahmadinejad: I'm wondering why you're adopting and fanatically defending the stance of the European politicians. You're a magazine, not a government. Saying that we should accept the world as it is would mean that the winners of World War II would remain the victorious powers for another 1,000 years and that the German people would be humiliated for another 1,000 years. Do you think that is the correct logic?
SPIEGEL: No, that's not the right logic, nor is it true. The Germans have played a modest, but important role in post-war developments. They do not feel as though they have been humiliated and dishonored since 1945. We are too self-confident for that. But today we want to talk about Iran's current mission.
Ahmadinejad: Then we would accept that Palestinians are killed every day, that they die in terrorist attacks, and that houses are being destroyed. But let me say something about Iraq. We have always favored peace and security in the region. For eight years, the Western countries provided arms to Saddam in the war against us, including chemical weapons, and gave him political support. We were against Saddam and suffered severely because of him, so we're happy that he has been toppled. But we don't accept a whole country being swallowed under the pretext of wanting to topple Saddam. More than 100,000 Iraqis have lost their lives under the rule of the occupying forces. Fortunately, the Germans haven't been involved in this. We want security in Iraq.
SPIEGEL: But, Mr. President, who is swallowing Iraq? The United States has practically lost this war. By cooperating constructively, Iran might help the Americans consider their retreat from the country.
Ahmadinejad: This is very interesting: The Americans occupy the country, kill people, sell the oil and when they have lost, they blame others. We have very close ties to the Iraqi people. Many people on both sides of the border are related. We have lived side by side for thousands of years. Our holy pilgrimage sites are located in Iraq. Just like Iran, Iraq used to be a center of civilization.
SPIEGEL: What are you trying to say?
Ahmadinejad: We have always said that we support the popularly elected government of Iraq. But in my view the Americans are doing a bad job. They have sent us messages several times asking us for help and cooperation. They have said that we should talk together about Iraq. We publicly accepted this offer, although our people do not trust the Americans. But America has responded negatively and insulted us. Even now we're contributing to security in Iraq. We will hold talks only if the Americans change their behavior.
SPIEGEL: Do you enjoy provoking the Americans and the rest of the world now and then?
Ahmadinejad: No, I'm not insulting anyone. The letter that I wrote to Mr. Bush was polite.
SPIEGEL: We don't mean insult, but provoke.
Ahmadinejad: No, we feel animosity toward no one. We're concerned about the American soldiers who die in Iraq. Why do they have to die there? This war makes no sense. Why is there war when there is reason as well?
SPIEGEL: Is your letter to the president also a gesture toward the Americans that you wish to enter into direct negotiations?
Ahmadinejad: We clearly stated our position in this letter on how we view the problems in the world. Some powers have befouled the political atmosphere in the world because they consider lies and fraud to be legitimate. In our view that is very bad. We believe that all people deserve respect. Relationships have to be regulated on the basis of justice. When justice reigns, peace reigns. Unjust conditions aren't sustainable, even if Ahmadinejad does not criticize them.
SPIEGEL: This letter to the American president includes a passage about Sept. 11, 2001. The quote: "How could such an operation be planned and implemented without the coordination with secret and security services or without the far-reaching infiltration of these services?" Your statements always include so many innuendos. What is that supposed to mean? Did the CIA help Mohammed Atta and the other 18 terrorists conduct their attacks?
Ahmadinejad: No, that's not what I meant. We think that they should just say who is to blame. They should not use Sept. 11 as an excuse to launch a military attack against the Middle East. They should take those who are responsible for the attacks to court. We're not opposed to that; we condemned the attacks. We condemn any attack against innocent people.
SPIEGEL: In this letter you also write that Western liberalism has failed. What makes you say that?
Ahmadinejad: You see, for example you have a thousand definitions of the Palestinian problem and you offer all sorts of different definitions of democracy in its various forms. It does not make sense that a phenomenon depends on the opinions of many individuals who are free to interpret the phenomenon as they wish. You can't solve the problems of the world that way. We need a new approach. Of course we want the free will of the people to reign, but we need sustainable principles that enjoy universal acceptance - such as justice. Iran and the West agree on this.
SPIEGEL: What role can Europe play in the resolution of the nuclear conflict, and what do you expect of Germany?
Ahmadinejad: We have always cultivated good relations with Europe, especially with Germany. Our two peoples like each other. We're eager to deepen this relationship.
Europe has made three mistakes with respect to our people. The first mistake was to support the Shah's government. This has left our people disappointed and discontent. However, by offering asylum to Imam Khomeini, France earned a special position that it lost again later. The second mistake was to support Saddam in his war against us. The truth is that our people expected Europe to be on our side, not against us. The third mistake was Europe's stance on the nuclear issue. Europe will be the big loser and will achieve nothing. We don't want to see that happen.
SPIEGEL: What will happen now in the conflict between the West and Iran?
Ahmadinejad: We understand the Americans' logic. They suffered damage as a result of the victory of the Islamic Revolution. But we're puzzled why some European countries are opposed to us. I sent out a message on the nuclear issue, asking why the Europeans were translating the Americans' words for us. After all, they know that our actions are aimed toward peace. By siding with Iran, the Europeans would serve their own and our interests. But they will suffer only damage if they oppose us. For our people is strong and determined.
The Europeans risk losing their position in the Middle East entirely, and they are ruining their reputation in other parts of the world. The others will think that the Europeans aren't capable of solving problems.
SPIEGEL: Mr. President, we thank you for this interview.
Source
May 09, 2006
Letter to President Bush
Mr George Bush, President of the United States of America
For some time now, I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hope that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.
Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him -- PBUH), the great Messenger of God, Feel obliged to respect human rights, Present liberalism as a civilization model, Announce one's opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, Make War against Terror his slogan, and finally, Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, But at the same time, Have countries attacked, The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed, and on the slight chance that there are criminals in a village, city, or convoy, for example, set the entire village, city or convoy ablaze? Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water resources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, the sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harm’s way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that every day some commit suicide and those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of ailments; while some are killed and their bodies handed off to their families.
On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with.
Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal; nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.
Mr President,
You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me: How can these actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness.
There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.
European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.
Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them.
Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.
Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did not exist. They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.
I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, in which tens of millions of people perished, news about the war was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.
Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the State of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalized or explained?
Mr President,
I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established: Many thousands were killed in the process.
Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.
Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.
This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of its establishment; unfortunately, it has been ongoing for sixty years now.
A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.
Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported? Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values? Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?
The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievably, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognize the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.
If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such a position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?
Mr President,
As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them --many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They do not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.
It is not my intention to pose too many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.
Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations?
You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilized for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.
Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.
Mr President,
Don't Latin Americans have the right to ask why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?
The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don't they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others?
Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights?
The brave and faithful people of Iran, too, have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d'état of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborate this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating in their country's progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.
Mr President,
September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathy.
All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?
All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9/11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climate of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damage incurred from fear and panic?
American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why were the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?
Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of the media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.
Will the truth not be lost in a contrived and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values? Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?
Mr President,
In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.
The question here is what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?
As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course, these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?
What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is: Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.
The people will scrutinize our presidencies.
Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported special interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs? Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them? Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them? Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats? Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it? Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors? Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns, intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trampling on people's rights? And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?
Mr President,
How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – haunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people's houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?
If the billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movements were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and extinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts, where would the world be today? Would not your government and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration's political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American government?
Mr President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.
If the prophets Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us?
My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH). All divine religions share and respect one word and that is monotheism or belief in a single God and no other in the world.
The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on all followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] “Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but God and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides God. But if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (From the Chapter “The Family of Imran”).
Mr President,
According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship God and follow the teachings of divine prophets. To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases. The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the hearts of His servants and records their deeds. The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court, planning for the universe is done by His hands, and who gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins. He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors. He is the Compassionate, the Merciful. He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness. He is witness to the actions of His servants. He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast. He calls on his servants to heed His prophets, and He is a witness to their deeds. A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants. And a good and eternal paradise belongs to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.
We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvation. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.
We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well: [19,36] “And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serve Him; this is the right path.” (The Chapter “Mariam.”)
Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers.
The God of all peoples in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to humans.
We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollution. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”
All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well.
Divine prophets have promised: The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Heaven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly affected by our actions.
All prophets speak of peace and tranquility for humanity – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.
Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of humanity, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance?
Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice?
Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected?
Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets?
Mr President, History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive. God has entrusted the fate of humanity to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him.
Can one deny the signs of change in the world today? Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.
The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the world feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and do not accept dubious policies.
The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.
The people are disgusted with the increasing corruption.
The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organizations, because their rights are not advocated by these organizations.
Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.
We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is, the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: Do you not want to join them?
Mr President,
Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.
Vasalam Ala Man Ataba'al hoda (“Blessed are the followers of truth”)
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Source
For some time now, I have been thinking, how one can justify the undeniable contradictions that exist in the international arena -- which are being constantly debated, especially in political forums and amongst university students. Many questions remain unanswered. These have prompted me to discuss some of the contradictions and questions, in the hope that it might bring about an opportunity to redress them.
Can one be a follower of Jesus Christ (peace be upon him -- PBUH), the great Messenger of God, Feel obliged to respect human rights, Present liberalism as a civilization model, Announce one's opposition to the proliferation of nuclear weapons and WMDs, Make War against Terror his slogan, and finally, Work towards the establishment of a unified international community – a community which Christ and the virtuous of the Earth will one day govern, But at the same time, Have countries attacked, The lives, reputations and possessions of people destroyed, and on the slight chance that there are criminals in a village, city, or convoy, for example, set the entire village, city or convoy ablaze? Or because of the possibility of the existence of WMDs in one country, it is occupied, around one hundred thousand people killed, its water resources, agriculture and industry destroyed, close to 180,000 foreign troops put on the ground, the sanctity of private homes of citizens broken, and the country pushed back perhaps fifty years. At what price? Hundreds of billions of dollars spent from the treasury of one country and certain other countries and tens of thousands of young men and women – as occupation troops – put in harm’s way, taken away from family and love ones, their hands stained with the blood of others, subjected to so much psychological pressure that every day some commit suicide and those returning home suffer depression, become sickly and grapple with all sorts of ailments; while some are killed and their bodies handed off to their families.
On the pretext of the existence of WMDs, this great tragedy came to engulf both the peoples of the occupied and the occupying country. Later it was revealed that no WMDs existed to begin with.
Of course Saddam was a murderous dictator. But the war was not waged to topple him, the announced goal of the war was to find and destroy weapons of mass destruction. He was toppled along the way towards another goal; nevertheless the people of the region are happy about it. I point out that throughout the many years of the war on Iran Saddam was supported by the West.
Mr President,
You might know that I am a teacher. My students ask me: How can these actions be reconciled with the values outlined at the beginning of this letter and duty to the tradition of Jesus Christ (PBUH), the Messenger of peace and forgiveness.
There are prisoners in Guantanamo Bay that have not been tried, have no legal representation, their families cannot see them and are obviously kept in a strange land outside their own country. There is no international monitoring of their conditions and fate. No one knows whether they are prisoners, POWs, accused or criminals.
European investigators have confirmed the existence of secret prisons in Europe too. I could not correlate the abduction of a person, and him or her being kept in secret prisons, with the provisions of any judicial system. For that matter, I fail to understand how such actions correspond to the values outlined in the beginning of this letter, i.e. the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH), human rights and liberal values.
Young people, university students and ordinary people have many questions about the phenomenon of Israel. I am sure you are familiar with some of them.
Throughout history many countries have been occupied, but I think the establishment of a new country with a new people is a new phenomenon that is exclusive to our times.
Students are saying that sixty years ago such a country did not exist. They show old documents and globes and say try as we have, we have not been able to find a country named Israel.
I tell them to study the history of WWI and II. One of my students told me that during WWII, in which tens of millions of people perished, news about the war was quickly disseminated by the warring parties. Each touted their victories and the most recent battlefront defeat of the other party. After the war, they claimed that six million Jews had been killed. Six million people that were surely related to at least two million families.
Again let us assume that these events are true. Does that logically translate into the establishment of the State of Israel in the Middle East or support for such a state? How can this phenomenon be rationalized or explained?
Mr President,
I am sure you know how – and at what cost – Israel was established: Many thousands were killed in the process.
Millions of indigenous people were made refugees.
Hundred of thousands of hectares of farmland, olive plantations, towns and villages were destroyed.
This tragedy is not exclusive to the time of its establishment; unfortunately, it has been ongoing for sixty years now.
A regime has been established which does not show mercy even to kids, destroys houses while the occupants are still in them, announces beforehand its list and plans to assassinate Palestinian figures and keeps thousands of Palestinians in prison. Such a phenomenon is unique – or at the very least extremely rare – in recent memory.
Another big question asked by people is why is this regime being supported? Is support for this regime in line with the teachings of Jesus Christ (PBUH) or Moses (PBUH) or liberal values? Or are we to understand that allowing the original inhabitants of these lands – inside and outside Palestine – whether they are Christian, Muslim or Jew, to determine their fate, runs contrary to principles of democracy, human rights and the teachings of prophets? If not, why is there so much opposition to a referendum?
The newly elected Palestinian administration recently took office. All independent observes have confirmed that this government represents the electorate. Unbelievably, they have put the elected government under pressure and have advised it to recognize the Israeli regime, abandon the struggle and follow the programs of the previous government.
If the current Palestinian government had run on the above platform, would the Palestinian people have voted for it? Again, can such a position taken in opposition to the Palestinian government be reconciled with the values outlined earlier? The people are also saying why are all UNSC resolutions in condemnation of Israel vetoed?
Mr President,
As you are well aware, I live amongst the people and am in constant contact with them --many people from around the Middle East manage to contact me as well. They do not have faith in these dubious policies either. There is evidence that the people of the region are becoming increasingly angry with such policies.
It is not my intention to pose too many questions, but I need to refer to other points as well.
Why is it that any technological and scientific achievement reached in the Middle East regions is translated into and portrayed as a threat to the Zionist regime? Is not scientific R&D one of the basic rights of nations?
You are familiar with history. Aside from the Middle Ages, in what other point in history has scientific and technical progress been a crime? Can the possibility of scientific achievements being utilized for military purposes be reason enough to oppose science and technology altogether? If such a supposition is true, then all scientific disciplines, including physics, chemistry, mathematics, medicine, engineering, etc. must be opposed.
Lies were told in the Iraqi matter. What was the result? I have no doubt that telling lies is reprehensible in any culture, and you do not like to be lied to.
Mr President,
Don't Latin Americans have the right to ask why their elected governments are being opposed and coup leaders supported? Or, why must they constantly be threatened and live in fear?
The people of Africa are hardworking, creative and talented. They can play an important and valuable role in providing for the needs of humanity and contribute to its material and spiritual progress. Poverty and hardship in large parts of Africa are preventing this from happening. Don't they have the right to ask why their enormous wealth – including minerals – is being looted, despite the fact that they need it more than others?
Again, do such actions correspond to the teachings of Christ and the tenets of human rights?
The brave and faithful people of Iran, too, have many questions and grievances, including: the coup d'état of 1953 and the subsequent toppling of the legal government of the day, opposition to the Islamic revolution, transformation of an Embassy into a headquarters supporting the activities of those opposing the Islamic Republic (many thousands of pages of documents corroborate this claim), support for Saddam in the war waged against Iran, the shooting down of an Iranian passenger plane, freezing the assets of the Iranian nation, increasing threats, anger and displeasure vis-à-vis the scientific and nuclear progress of the Iranian nation (just when all Iranians are jubilant and collaborating in their country's progress), and many other grievances that I will not refer to in this letter.
Mr President,
September Eleven was a horrendous incident. The killing of innocents is deplorable and appalling in any part of the world. Our government immediately declared its disgust with the perpetrators and offered its condolences to the bereaved and expressed its sympathy.
All governments have a duty to protect the lives, property and good standing of their citizens. Reportedly your government employs extensive security, protection and intelligence systems – and even hunts its opponents abroad. September eleven was not a simple operation. Could it be planned and executed without coordination with intelligence and security services – or their extensive infiltration? Of course this is just an educated guess. Why have the various aspects of the attacks been kept secret? Why are we not told who botched their responsibilities? And, why aren't those responsible and the guilty parties identified and put on trial?
All governments have a duty to provide security and peace of mind for their citizens. For some years now, the people of your country and neighbours of world trouble spots do not have peace of mind. After 9/11, instead of healing and tending to the emotional wounds of the survivors and the American people – who had been immensely traumatized by the attacks – some Western media only intensified the climate of fear and insecurity – some constantly talked about the possibility of new terror attacks and kept the people in fear. Is that service to the American people? Is it possible to calculate the damage incurred from fear and panic?
American citizens lived in constant fear of fresh attacks that could come at any moment and in any place. They felt insecure in the streets, in their place of work and at home. Who would be happy with this situation? Why were the media, instead of conveying a feeling of security and providing peace of mind, giving rise to a feeling of insecurity?
Some believe that the hype paved the way – and was the justification – for an attack on Afghanistan. Again I need to refer to the role of the media. In media charters, correct dissemination of information and honest reporting of a story are established tenets. I express my deep regret about the disregard shown by certain Western media for these principles. The main pretext for an attack on Iraq was the existence of WMDs. This was repeated incessantly – for the public to, finally, believe – and the ground set for an attack on Iraq.
Will the truth not be lost in a contrived and deceptive climate? Again, if the truth is allowed to be lost, how can that be reconciled with the earlier mentioned values? Is the truth known to the Almighty lost as well?
Mr President,
In countries around the world, citizens provide for the expenses of governments so that their governments in turn are able to serve them.
The question here is what has the hundreds of billions of dollars, spent every year to pay for the Iraqi campaign, produced for the citizens?
As your Excellency is aware, in some states of your country, people are living in poverty. Many thousands are homeless and unemployment is a huge problem. Of course, these problems exist – to a larger or lesser extent – in other countries as well. With these conditions in mind, can the gargantuan expenses of the campaign – paid from the public treasury – be explained and be consistent with the aforementioned principles?
What has been said, are some of the grievances of the people around the world, in our region and in your country. But my main contention – which I am hoping you will agree to some of it – is: Those in power have specific time in office, and do not rule indefinitely, but their names will be recorded in history and will be constantly judged in the immediate and distant futures.
The people will scrutinize our presidencies.
Did we manage to bring peace, security and prosperity for the people or insecurity and unemployment? Did we intend to establish justice, or just supported special interest groups, and by forcing many people to live in poverty and hardship, made a few people rich and powerful – thus trading the approval of the people and the Almighty with theirs? Did we defend the rights of the underprivileged or ignore them? Did we defend the rights of all people around the world or imposed wars on them, interfered illegally in their affairs, established hellish prisons and incarcerated some of them? Did we bring the world peace and security or raised the specter of intimidation and threats? Did we tell the truth to our nation and others around the world or presented an inverted version of it? Were we on the side of people or the occupiers and oppressors? Did our administration set out to promote rational behaviour, logic, ethics, peace, fulfilling obligations, justice, service to the people, prosperity, progress and respect for human dignity or the force of guns, intimidation, insecurity, disregard for the people, delaying the progress and excellence of other nations, and trampling on people's rights? And finally, they will judge us on whether we remained true to our oath of office – to serve the people, which is our main task, and the traditions of the prophets – or not?
Mr President,
How much longer can the world tolerate this situation? Where will this trend lead the world to? How long must the people of the world pay for the incorrect decisions of some rulers? How much longer will the specter of insecurity – raised from the stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction – haunt the people of the world? How much longer will the blood of the innocent men, women and children be spilled on the streets, and people's houses destroyed over their heads? Are you pleased with the current condition of the world? Do you think present policies can continue?
If the billions of dollars spent on security, military campaigns and troop movements were instead spent on investment and assistance for poor countries, promotion of health, combating different diseases, education and improvement of mental and physical fitness, assistance to victims of natural disasters, creation of employment opportunities and production, development projects and poverty alleviation, establishment of peace, mediation between disputing states and extinguishing the flames of racial, ethnic and other conflicts, where would the world be today? Would not your government and people be justifiably proud? Would not your administration's political and economic standing have been stronger? And I am most sorry to say, would there have been an ever increasing global hatred of the American government?
Mr President, it is not my intention to distress anyone.
If the prophets Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Ishmael, Joseph or Jesus Christ (PBUH) were with us today, how would they have judged such behaviour? Will we be given a role to play in the promised world, where justice will become universal and Jesus Christ (PBUH) will be present? Will they even accept us?
My basic question is this: Is there no better way to interact with the rest of the world? Today there are hundreds of millions of Christians, hundreds of millions of Moslems and millions of people who follow the teachings of Moses (PBUH). All divine religions share and respect one word and that is monotheism or belief in a single God and no other in the world.
The holy Koran stresses this common word and calls on all followers of divine religions and says: [3.64] “Say: O followers of the Book! Come to an equitable proposition between us and you that we shall not serve any but God and (that) we shall not associate aught with Him and (that) some of us shall not take others for lords besides God. But if they turn back, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims. (From the Chapter “The Family of Imran”).
Mr President,
According to divine verses, we have all been called upon to worship God and follow the teachings of divine prophets. To worship a God which is above all powers in the world and can do all He pleases. The Lord which knows that which is hidden and visible, the past and the future, knows what goes on in the hearts of His servants and records their deeds. The Lord who is the possessor of the heavens and the earth and all universe is His court, planning for the universe is done by His hands, and who gives His servants the glad tidings of mercy and forgiveness of sins. He is the companion of the oppressed and the enemy of oppressors. He is the Compassionate, the Merciful. He is the recourse of the faithful and guides them towards the light from darkness. He is witness to the actions of His servants. He calls on servants to be faithful and do good deeds, and asks them to stay on the path of righteousness and remain steadfast. He calls on his servants to heed His prophets, and He is a witness to their deeds. A bad ending belongs only to those who have chosen the life of this world and disobey Him and oppress His servants. And a good and eternal paradise belongs to those servants who fear His majesty and do not follow their lascivious selves.
We believe a return to the teachings of the divine prophets is the only road leading to salvation. I have been told that Your Excellency follows the teachings of Jesus (PBUH), and believes in the divine promise of the rule of the righteous on Earth.
We also believe that Jesus Christ (PBUH) was one of the great prophets of the Almighty. He has been repeatedly praised in the Koran. Jesus (PBUH) has been quoted in Koran as well: [19,36] “And surely Allah is my Lord and your Lord, therefore serve Him; this is the right path.” (The Chapter “Mariam.”)
Service to and obedience of the Almighty is the credo of all divine messengers.
The God of all peoples in Europe, Asia, Africa, America, the Pacific and the rest of the world is one. He is the Almighty who wants to guide and give dignity to all His servants. He has given greatness to humans.
We again read in the Holy Book: “The Almighty God sent His prophets with miracles and clear signs to guide the people and show them divine signs and purity them from sins and pollution. And He sent the Book and the balance so that the people display justice and avoid the rebellious.”
All of the above verses can be seen, one way or the other, in the Good Book as well.
Divine prophets have promised: The day will come when all humans will congregate before the court of the Almighty, so that their deeds are examined. The good will be directed towards Heaven and evildoers will meet divine retribution. I trust both of us believe in such a day, but it will not be easy to calculate the actions of rulers, because we must be answerable to our nations and all others whose lives have been directly or indirectly affected by our actions.
All prophets speak of peace and tranquility for humanity – based on monotheism, justice and respect for human dignity.
Do you not think that if all of us come to believe in and abide by these principles, that is, monotheism, worship of God, justice, respect for the dignity of humanity, belief in the Last Day, we can overcome the present problems of the world – that are the result of disobedience to the Almighty and the teachings of prophets – and improve our performance?
Do you not think that belief in these principles promotes and guarantees peace, friendship and justice?
Do you not think that the aforementioned written or unwritten principles are universally respected?
Will you not accept this invitation? That is, a genuine return to the teachings of prophets, to monotheism and justice, to preserve human dignity and obedience to the Almighty and His prophets?
Mr President, History tells us that repressive and cruel governments do not survive. God has entrusted the fate of humanity to them. The Almighty has not left the universe and humanity to their own devices. Many things have happened contrary to the wishes and plans of governments. These tell us that there is a higher power at work and all events are determined by Him.
Can one deny the signs of change in the world today? Is this situation of the world today comparable to that of ten years ago? Changes happen fast and come at a furious pace.
The people of the world are not happy with the status quo and pay little heed to the promises and comments made by a number of influential world leaders. Many people around the world feel insecure and oppose the spreading of insecurity and war and do not approve of and do not accept dubious policies.
The people are protesting the increasing gap between the haves and the have-nots and the rich and poor countries.
The people are disgusted with the increasing corruption.
The people of many countries are angry about the attacks on their cultural foundations and the disintegration of families. They are equally dismayed with the fading of care and compassion. The people of the world have no faith in international organizations, because their rights are not advocated by these organizations.
Liberalism and Western style democracy have not been able to help realize the ideals of humanity. Today these two concepts have failed. Those with insight can already hear the sounds of the shattering and fall of the ideology and thoughts of the liberal democratic systems.
We increasingly see that people around the world are flocking towards a main focal point – that is, the Almighty God. Undoubtedly through faith in God and the teachings of the prophets, the people will conquer their problems. My question for you is: Do you not want to join them?
Mr President,
Whether we like it or not, the world is gravitating towards faith in the Almighty and justice and the will of God will prevail over all things.
Vasalam Ala Man Ataba'al hoda (“Blessed are the followers of truth”)
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of the Islamic Republic of Iran
Source
April 24, 2006
Press Conference
April 14, 2006
Speech at Al-Qods [Jerusalem] International Conference, Tehran
In the Name of God, the Merciful, the Compassionate
Dear Scholars and Thinkers; Honorable Speakers and Members of Parliament, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you,
On behalf of our beloved people and the government of the Islamic Republic, I would like to welcome you and express my own thanks and appreciation for your attendance. I hope your blessed and fruitful presence at this conference will help ease the inconvenience of your journey from countries far and near.
Fortunately, this conference coincides with the anniversary of the birth of Islam’s glorious Prophet, which is an auspicious concurrence.
The Prophet of Islam is the messenger of compassion, mercy, justice and human dignity. He is the focus of the unity of all believers in God and all Muslims, and the harbinger of peace and harmony on the basis of justice and faith in God. Our beloved prophet desired the welfare of all humanity, was the pinnacle of human perfection, and the inheritor of all divine prophets. I offer my felicitations on the occasion of the anniversary of this auspicious birth to the honourable participants, to all Muslims and to all humanity.
Excellencies, Dear sisters and brothers;
The question of Palestine has been a tribulation for the people of the region and the Islamic community for the past sixty years. The suffering inflicted by the Zionist occupiers upon the people of the region, Muslims and especially the Palestinian people, is a gnawing torment that cannot easily be redressed, and I would like to give a brief account of it here:
Permanent Threat
The existence of the [Zionist] regime is tantamount to the permanent imposition of an unbridled threat, so that none of the Islamic nations and countries of the region can feel secure from its threat. The closer these countries and nations are to the epicenter of this threat, the more insecure they feel. The people of Palestine exist within the context of such a threat. For that reason, they have not spent even a single day with peace of mind and tranquility for at least the past sixty years. Three generations of the children of Palestine have lived and are presently living under these circumstances. The peoples of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and the entire Middle East are essentially in a similar situation.
Waste of the Immense Resources of the Region and the Islamic Community
As a result of the presence of the usurper Zionist regime, an enormous portion of the wealth and assets of the Islamic countries and the region are spent on maintaining defensive strength, and at times on actual defense. In addition, an important part of the human resources, which are the most fundamental assets of any nation, have been expended for the same purpose.
Insult to the Dignity of the Faithful and Believers
The existence of such a threat has tainted the dignity of the Islamic community, the believers, and the faithful. In accordance with the noble verse [from the Qur’an], “God has never opened a path for unbelievers to dominate believers,” the domination of such a regime over the portion of Muslims and believers that reside in the occupied territories and the region is contrary to the will of the Almighty.
By its unending murders and massacres, destruction of homes and farms, desecration of sacred shrines, mosques and churches, unrelenting invasion of residential and non-residential places, planned and announced assassinations, [the Zionist regime] tramples not only on the dignity of Palestinians, but also on the dignity of all Muslims and freedom-loving people of the world.
How long can this situation last and be tolerated? When Imam Ali, Commander of the Faithful [599-661 AD], heard that invading enemies had forcibly removed an anklet from the feet of a Jewish woman in one of the frontier cities under his rule, he said: "One should not blame a man who dies from grief over such an outrage.”
Today, they show no mercy even to children, and target them with their bullets. Palestinian men and women are abducted and tortured in their fearsome prisons. People are shot dead on the streets, at markets, and in schools. Do such scenes befit the dignity and pride of Islam and humanity?
Sowing disunity in the Islamic world and among the nations of the region
Sowing disunity among the nations and governments of the region is the foundation of the continued existence of this usurper regime. By their insidious interference and by creating an atmosphere of mistrust and resentment, they divide the countries and governments of the region, so that in this atmosphere and by setting up certain covert relationships, they make possible the imposition of costly military and economic pacts, along with the disgraceful political burdens of the dominant system on the nations and governments of the region. The Zionist regime is the focus of accord for the bullying countries and the adversaries of the Islamic community, and an adversary of Muslims. Enemies and ill-wishers, by strengthening and supporting such a threat, put effective pressure on the Islamic community and the countries and nations of the region, and, despite their deep and numerous differences, they converge and are united at this single point.
In fact, all of the dominant powers impose their power on Muslims through the regime that occupies Jerusalem; and that regime, as their agent, has assumed the responsibility to terrorize, threaten, sow disunity, and sabotage the political, economic and cultural relations between the countries of the region with each other and with other countries of the world.
Preventing the Progress and Advancement of the Islamic Countries
The bullying powers use various excuses to prevent the transfer of science, technology and progress to the nations of the region, and regard [our advancement] as a threat to the corrupt Zionist regime. They do not allow the countries of the region to tread on the path to progress and advancement. They even oppose indigenous technologies in the Islamic countries, and interpret any scientific advancement as a threat to the security of the regime that occupies Jerusalem.
Do you see how they treat our nation that, relying on the creativity of its own scientists, has been able to achieve access to nuclear technology? Whereas today, nuclear technology is one of the primary foundations for progress and serving the people; and in the not too distant future, nations lacking this technology will have no choice but to resort to it in order to provide their energy needs, as well as to use nuclear technology in scientific, technical, and manufacturing fields.
Affronts against Sanctities and Destruction of Cultural Heritage
The desecration of the al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the demographic and physical alterations in Jerusalem and the al-Aqsa Mosque that are revered by all believers and the followers of all monotheistic religions are the consequences of the Zionist occupation, which has devastated this monotheistic institution, and has ruined this precious heritage of humanity.
The Exile of the Innocent Palestinians
Today, the exile of millions of Palestinians from their fatherland is a pain and brutality whose dimensions are indescribable.
Excellencies; distinguished parliamentarians; dear sisters and brothers;
What I briefly referred to are some of the consequences of the continuation of such an artificial regime. The question is: What is the philosophy behind the establishment and imposition of such a regime by certain Western powers?
Some Western powers believe that during the Second World War they killed a large number of Jewish people, and that they founded the occupying regime in order to atone for such a tragedy.
With reverence towards all ethnicities, nations, and followers of divine religions, our question is this: If such a tragedy is true, why should it be atoned for in Islamic countries, at the expense of the people of this region, through the occupation of Palestinian lands and the unending repression of Palestinian people, the exile of millions of Palestinians, the destruction of their cities, villages, and farms, and with fire, bullets, and force?
Is the tragedy of the establishment of such a regime less of a tragedy than the Holocaust that you have claimed? If there are serious doubts regarding the Holocaust, there is no doubt regarding the Palestinian tragedy and Holocaust.
The Holocaust in Palestine has persisted for more than sixty years.
Excellencies, dear sisters and brothers;
The bitter truth is that, for the last several decades, a widespread network of Zionists, aiming at domination and mastery, has enlisted the services of the bullying and powerful governments, and certain weaker governments in the West have succumbed to the Zionists.
Today, it is not only the Palestinians and the Islamic world that are affected by the threat of Zionism, but also a huge part of the economic and political interests of the people in the West are hostage to the Zionists.
I regret to affirm that the governments under the influence of the Zionists in some European countries, for the sake of consolidating the pillars of their power, are prepared to make the financial, industrial and agricultural resources and key posts of their countries available to them, and to sacrifice the freedom, dignity and honour of their citizens under the feet of the Zionists. There is much to say regarding this matter that, God willing, I will share with all nations, and especially the people of Europe, in due course.
The question of Palestine is not solely a question for the Islamic world, but rather today’s issue for humanity. The tragedy of the occupation in Palestine and daily atrocities have harmed the dignity and honour of humanity.
Can a high-minded person condone what is happening in the occupied territories? So many Palestinians have passed away yearning for return to their homes, and so many Palestinian children live with the dream of returning to Palestine, and hope to return to the homes of their fathers.
What is the remedy, and what is the solution?
Excellencies; dear sisters and brothers;
Peace and harmony can only be based on belief in God, protection of human dignity, and justice.
Oppression and aggression are not compatible with belief in God, human dignity and justice. The Zionist regime is a clear example of oppression, and its fundamental nature represents an actual and permanent threat. Its establishment was for this very purpose, namely to put in place a permanent threat in the region. Therefore, its continued existence is a continuation of threat and oppression, and it would not exist without threat and aggression, and is not inherently able to survive in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility. Such a regime, even if it remains established in one square meter of the land of Palestine, will continue to be a threat.
Take a good look at the bullying powers of the world. When it comes to supporting the Zionist regime, they recognize no red line and boundaries for justice, human rights and human dignity. The usurper Zionist regime is the point of convergence of all of the corruption and injustices of the corrupt and bullying powers.
Only a popular democratic government can resolve the problem of Palestine and the people of the region. The right to govern belongs to all the people of Palestine, and it is they who must decide their form of government and elect their own officials. For this purpose, there must be an opportunity for all people of Palestinian heritage, whether Muslims, Christians, or Jews, residing within Palestine or in exile in other countries, to participate in a free referendum to decide their form of government and their leaders. In other words, the only wise and rational path that is compatible with the recognized international norms is to hold a referendum with the participation of all people of Palestinian heritage.
The supporters of the Zionist regime are silent in the face of this powerful logic.
I tell them that regardless of what they desire or do not desire, the Zionist regime is falling apart.
The young tree of resistance in Palestine is blooming, and the blossoms of faith and desire for freedom are bearing fruit. The Zionist regime is a decaying and crumbling tree that will break up with a storm. Today even the immigrants inhabiting occupied Palestine, especially the African and Asian immigrants, live in misery and poverty, and discontent.
I tell the governments supporting the Zionist regime:
Open the doors to the prison of occupied Palestine, and allow the immigrants to return to their original homes, and summon the usurpers of the land of Palestine as well. Of course, if you still consider yourself indebted to them, then find a proper place for them in your own territories; otherwise, call upon them to return to their countries of origin to live like their forefathers.
Ladies and Gentlemen;
Today we are all accountable in facing the question of Palestine. The enemies of humanity are struggling to preserve this nest of intrigue. They are using the resources and wealth of their own people to keep such a regime in power, at the expense of the poverty and destitution of their own nations.
With the grace of the Almighty, today the nations of the world, especially the Muslim nations, are awake and are the greatest bulwark of the people of Palestine in the struggle against the Zionist usurpers.
Islamic governments can solve the problem of Palestine by their unity and solidarity.
The parliaments of countries can play an important role in awakening and forging unity among nations by placing the question of Palestine in their permanent agenda.
The question of Palestine is the present and lasting concern of not only Muslims, but the entire humanity.
Palestine is the point of convergence and differentiation of right and wrong. The freedom of Palestine is the present aspiration of humanity. We must believe that good will prevail and evil will depart. We must believe that Palestine will soon be free.
A regime based on injustice and threats cannot survive. Today all the necessary conditions for the freedom of Palestine are on hand and available. Vigilance, unity and resistance are the keys to victory.
The destiny of the region will be decided in the land of Jerusalem, and it will be a great honour to share in the victory of Palestine.
I pray to the Almighty for the honour and strength of the Islamic community and the victory of the Palestinian people.
Once again I offer my congratulations on the auspicious birth of our dear Prophet, and thank the organizers of this conference.
I thank all the dear guests and brothers and sisters for their attendance, and hope the results of this conference will be a long step forward in realizing the noble Palestinian cause.
Source
Dear Scholars and Thinkers; Honorable Speakers and Members of Parliament, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Peace and God’s mercy and blessings be upon you,
On behalf of our beloved people and the government of the Islamic Republic, I would like to welcome you and express my own thanks and appreciation for your attendance. I hope your blessed and fruitful presence at this conference will help ease the inconvenience of your journey from countries far and near.
Fortunately, this conference coincides with the anniversary of the birth of Islam’s glorious Prophet, which is an auspicious concurrence.
The Prophet of Islam is the messenger of compassion, mercy, justice and human dignity. He is the focus of the unity of all believers in God and all Muslims, and the harbinger of peace and harmony on the basis of justice and faith in God. Our beloved prophet desired the welfare of all humanity, was the pinnacle of human perfection, and the inheritor of all divine prophets. I offer my felicitations on the occasion of the anniversary of this auspicious birth to the honourable participants, to all Muslims and to all humanity.
Excellencies, Dear sisters and brothers;
The question of Palestine has been a tribulation for the people of the region and the Islamic community for the past sixty years. The suffering inflicted by the Zionist occupiers upon the people of the region, Muslims and especially the Palestinian people, is a gnawing torment that cannot easily be redressed, and I would like to give a brief account of it here:
Permanent Threat
The existence of the [Zionist] regime is tantamount to the permanent imposition of an unbridled threat, so that none of the Islamic nations and countries of the region can feel secure from its threat. The closer these countries and nations are to the epicenter of this threat, the more insecure they feel. The people of Palestine exist within the context of such a threat. For that reason, they have not spent even a single day with peace of mind and tranquility for at least the past sixty years. Three generations of the children of Palestine have lived and are presently living under these circumstances. The peoples of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon and the entire Middle East are essentially in a similar situation.
Waste of the Immense Resources of the Region and the Islamic Community
As a result of the presence of the usurper Zionist regime, an enormous portion of the wealth and assets of the Islamic countries and the region are spent on maintaining defensive strength, and at times on actual defense. In addition, an important part of the human resources, which are the most fundamental assets of any nation, have been expended for the same purpose.
Insult to the Dignity of the Faithful and Believers
The existence of such a threat has tainted the dignity of the Islamic community, the believers, and the faithful. In accordance with the noble verse [from the Qur’an], “God has never opened a path for unbelievers to dominate believers,” the domination of such a regime over the portion of Muslims and believers that reside in the occupied territories and the region is contrary to the will of the Almighty.
By its unending murders and massacres, destruction of homes and farms, desecration of sacred shrines, mosques and churches, unrelenting invasion of residential and non-residential places, planned and announced assassinations, [the Zionist regime] tramples not only on the dignity of Palestinians, but also on the dignity of all Muslims and freedom-loving people of the world.
How long can this situation last and be tolerated? When Imam Ali, Commander of the Faithful [599-661 AD], heard that invading enemies had forcibly removed an anklet from the feet of a Jewish woman in one of the frontier cities under his rule, he said: "One should not blame a man who dies from grief over such an outrage.”
Today, they show no mercy even to children, and target them with their bullets. Palestinian men and women are abducted and tortured in their fearsome prisons. People are shot dead on the streets, at markets, and in schools. Do such scenes befit the dignity and pride of Islam and humanity?
Sowing disunity in the Islamic world and among the nations of the region
Sowing disunity among the nations and governments of the region is the foundation of the continued existence of this usurper regime. By their insidious interference and by creating an atmosphere of mistrust and resentment, they divide the countries and governments of the region, so that in this atmosphere and by setting up certain covert relationships, they make possible the imposition of costly military and economic pacts, along with the disgraceful political burdens of the dominant system on the nations and governments of the region. The Zionist regime is the focus of accord for the bullying countries and the adversaries of the Islamic community, and an adversary of Muslims. Enemies and ill-wishers, by strengthening and supporting such a threat, put effective pressure on the Islamic community and the countries and nations of the region, and, despite their deep and numerous differences, they converge and are united at this single point.
In fact, all of the dominant powers impose their power on Muslims through the regime that occupies Jerusalem; and that regime, as their agent, has assumed the responsibility to terrorize, threaten, sow disunity, and sabotage the political, economic and cultural relations between the countries of the region with each other and with other countries of the world.
Preventing the Progress and Advancement of the Islamic Countries
The bullying powers use various excuses to prevent the transfer of science, technology and progress to the nations of the region, and regard [our advancement] as a threat to the corrupt Zionist regime. They do not allow the countries of the region to tread on the path to progress and advancement. They even oppose indigenous technologies in the Islamic countries, and interpret any scientific advancement as a threat to the security of the regime that occupies Jerusalem.
Do you see how they treat our nation that, relying on the creativity of its own scientists, has been able to achieve access to nuclear technology? Whereas today, nuclear technology is one of the primary foundations for progress and serving the people; and in the not too distant future, nations lacking this technology will have no choice but to resort to it in order to provide their energy needs, as well as to use nuclear technology in scientific, technical, and manufacturing fields.
Affronts against Sanctities and Destruction of Cultural Heritage
The desecration of the al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem] and the demographic and physical alterations in Jerusalem and the al-Aqsa Mosque that are revered by all believers and the followers of all monotheistic religions are the consequences of the Zionist occupation, which has devastated this monotheistic institution, and has ruined this precious heritage of humanity.
The Exile of the Innocent Palestinians
Today, the exile of millions of Palestinians from their fatherland is a pain and brutality whose dimensions are indescribable.
Excellencies; distinguished parliamentarians; dear sisters and brothers;
What I briefly referred to are some of the consequences of the continuation of such an artificial regime. The question is: What is the philosophy behind the establishment and imposition of such a regime by certain Western powers?
Some Western powers believe that during the Second World War they killed a large number of Jewish people, and that they founded the occupying regime in order to atone for such a tragedy.
With reverence towards all ethnicities, nations, and followers of divine religions, our question is this: If such a tragedy is true, why should it be atoned for in Islamic countries, at the expense of the people of this region, through the occupation of Palestinian lands and the unending repression of Palestinian people, the exile of millions of Palestinians, the destruction of their cities, villages, and farms, and with fire, bullets, and force?
Is the tragedy of the establishment of such a regime less of a tragedy than the Holocaust that you have claimed? If there are serious doubts regarding the Holocaust, there is no doubt regarding the Palestinian tragedy and Holocaust.
The Holocaust in Palestine has persisted for more than sixty years.
Excellencies, dear sisters and brothers;
The bitter truth is that, for the last several decades, a widespread network of Zionists, aiming at domination and mastery, has enlisted the services of the bullying and powerful governments, and certain weaker governments in the West have succumbed to the Zionists.
Today, it is not only the Palestinians and the Islamic world that are affected by the threat of Zionism, but also a huge part of the economic and political interests of the people in the West are hostage to the Zionists.
I regret to affirm that the governments under the influence of the Zionists in some European countries, for the sake of consolidating the pillars of their power, are prepared to make the financial, industrial and agricultural resources and key posts of their countries available to them, and to sacrifice the freedom, dignity and honour of their citizens under the feet of the Zionists. There is much to say regarding this matter that, God willing, I will share with all nations, and especially the people of Europe, in due course.
The question of Palestine is not solely a question for the Islamic world, but rather today’s issue for humanity. The tragedy of the occupation in Palestine and daily atrocities have harmed the dignity and honour of humanity.
Can a high-minded person condone what is happening in the occupied territories? So many Palestinians have passed away yearning for return to their homes, and so many Palestinian children live with the dream of returning to Palestine, and hope to return to the homes of their fathers.
What is the remedy, and what is the solution?
Excellencies; dear sisters and brothers;
Peace and harmony can only be based on belief in God, protection of human dignity, and justice.
Oppression and aggression are not compatible with belief in God, human dignity and justice. The Zionist regime is a clear example of oppression, and its fundamental nature represents an actual and permanent threat. Its establishment was for this very purpose, namely to put in place a permanent threat in the region. Therefore, its continued existence is a continuation of threat and oppression, and it would not exist without threat and aggression, and is not inherently able to survive in an atmosphere of peace and tranquility. Such a regime, even if it remains established in one square meter of the land of Palestine, will continue to be a threat.
Take a good look at the bullying powers of the world. When it comes to supporting the Zionist regime, they recognize no red line and boundaries for justice, human rights and human dignity. The usurper Zionist regime is the point of convergence of all of the corruption and injustices of the corrupt and bullying powers.
Only a popular democratic government can resolve the problem of Palestine and the people of the region. The right to govern belongs to all the people of Palestine, and it is they who must decide their form of government and elect their own officials. For this purpose, there must be an opportunity for all people of Palestinian heritage, whether Muslims, Christians, or Jews, residing within Palestine or in exile in other countries, to participate in a free referendum to decide their form of government and their leaders. In other words, the only wise and rational path that is compatible with the recognized international norms is to hold a referendum with the participation of all people of Palestinian heritage.
The supporters of the Zionist regime are silent in the face of this powerful logic.
I tell them that regardless of what they desire or do not desire, the Zionist regime is falling apart.
The young tree of resistance in Palestine is blooming, and the blossoms of faith and desire for freedom are bearing fruit. The Zionist regime is a decaying and crumbling tree that will break up with a storm. Today even the immigrants inhabiting occupied Palestine, especially the African and Asian immigrants, live in misery and poverty, and discontent.
I tell the governments supporting the Zionist regime:
Open the doors to the prison of occupied Palestine, and allow the immigrants to return to their original homes, and summon the usurpers of the land of Palestine as well. Of course, if you still consider yourself indebted to them, then find a proper place for them in your own territories; otherwise, call upon them to return to their countries of origin to live like their forefathers.
Ladies and Gentlemen;
Today we are all accountable in facing the question of Palestine. The enemies of humanity are struggling to preserve this nest of intrigue. They are using the resources and wealth of their own people to keep such a regime in power, at the expense of the poverty and destitution of their own nations.
With the grace of the Almighty, today the nations of the world, especially the Muslim nations, are awake and are the greatest bulwark of the people of Palestine in the struggle against the Zionist usurpers.
Islamic governments can solve the problem of Palestine by their unity and solidarity.
The parliaments of countries can play an important role in awakening and forging unity among nations by placing the question of Palestine in their permanent agenda.
The question of Palestine is the present and lasting concern of not only Muslims, but the entire humanity.
Palestine is the point of convergence and differentiation of right and wrong. The freedom of Palestine is the present aspiration of humanity. We must believe that good will prevail and evil will depart. We must believe that Palestine will soon be free.
A regime based on injustice and threats cannot survive. Today all the necessary conditions for the freedom of Palestine are on hand and available. Vigilance, unity and resistance are the keys to victory.
The destiny of the region will be decided in the land of Jerusalem, and it will be a great honour to share in the victory of Palestine.
I pray to the Almighty for the honour and strength of the Islamic community and the victory of the Palestinian people.
Once again I offer my congratulations on the auspicious birth of our dear Prophet, and thank the organizers of this conference.
I thank all the dear guests and brothers and sisters for their attendance, and hope the results of this conference will be a long step forward in realizing the noble Palestinian cause.
Source
February 13, 2006
Interview with USA Today
Q: You talk a lot about the things that divide our two countries. What about the things we have in common, for example in Iraq?
A: If countries act on the basis of a set of principles, there can be common ground in many areas.
Q: As in Iraq?
A: If everyone is prepared to act on clear principles, there can be the possibility for common interests.
Q: You say you want Iran to progress but some of your comments have only further isolated the country. How can you progress if much of the world is opposed to Iran?
A: We are relying on the strength of our own people. The people of Iran have stood on their own feet throughout history and despite the bad intentions of their adversaries have been able to move forward.
Q: Don't you need Western investment to renovate your oil industry?
A: It is true but we are not going to compromise on our principles. There are many countries that are interested in working with us.
Q: Isn't it possible that you will face more economic sanctions?
A: It is true but these difficulties are the prelude to advancement. I believe those who want to impose limitations on us will lose more than us.
Q: Are you prepared for direct talks with the United States about the nuclear issue and other problems?
A: Iran is an Islamic country and as Muslims, the basis of our conduct is dialogue and rationality. Except for the occupiers of Jerusalem (Israel), we are prepared to talk to all countries of the world. But the United States has its own conditions. It wants to talk to other countries from a position of overbearing strength and that cannot be a good basis for constructive dialogue.
Q: Is there some signal the United States can send that it wants talks on an equal basis?
A: They have to take a hard look at their own behavior and ask themselves if they were in the place of other nations, what would they do. They choose to threaten us and make false allegations and they want to impose their lifestyle on others and this is not acceptable.
Q: You have made many promises to the Iranian people but how will you keep them? Are handouts sufficient to help the economy?
A: I am among the very rare few politicians that do not usually give promises. I have promised that I will work and we have a good and very coherent program for the advancement of our nation. Iran is a large country with very good human and financial resources. There is no program for just giving handouts.
Q: Foreign diplomats tell me that the brain drain is increasing and Iranian applications for visas for the West are up 20-50%?
A: The information I have is the contrary. There always has been travel back and forth.
Q: I hear that $200 billion in Iranian funds has fled to Dubai in recent months?
A: Those who have given that figure don't know the magnitude of $200 billion. We have relations with neighboring countries. There is investment back and forth. Dubai is a free trade area. It is natural that many Iranians go there to make investments. What is important is that the result of their work comes back to Iran. Last year, $8 billion was invested in the United Arab Emirates and $11 billion returned.
Q: Why do you say the things you do about Israel and the Holocaust when it only upsets people and further isolates Iran?
A: I don't know who is annoyed by revealing facts. But we know for sure that the people of Palestine are being killed every day with the Holocaust as a pretext, and the people of the region have been deprived of peace and security. One day they (the Israelis) used to utter the slogan of the "Nile to the Euphrates." It means they have a larger plan to aggress other nations of the region.
Q: But Israel withdrew from Gaza last September.
A: They had no choice. They were forced to. Isn't the question of Palestine the most important issue in the region?
Q: A lot of Iranians would say no.
A: Apart from those Iranians you mention, the most important problem facing the region is Palestine. This regime (Israel) was founded on the basis of propaganda regarding the Holocaust.
Q: Why don't you go to Auschwitz and see the gas chambers for yourself?
A: My going there will not solve the problem. I cannot take a trip back 60 years but researchers can do that.
Q: Would you accept the testimony of Holocaust survivors in Iran?
A: We accept them but an impartial group should (also) go there and investigate.
Q: But it's established historical fact that all those people died, the same way it is established fact that the CIA overthrew Prime Minister Mossadegh in 1953.
A: If we assume that is true, then the Westerners would have to pay the cost. Why should the people of Palestine pay the cost? If we provide the right answer to this question, the most important problem of the region will be solved. We want to find a fundamental solution to the problem. We believe if we can go to the root of the problem, security and peace will come to the region.
Q: I have met several of your childhood friends and they say you were a nice and studious kid and played soccer in a special way. But none of them voted for you. Why?
A: I don't know the background and I can't make a judgment. People are free to vote. We are all friends even those who haven't voted for me.
Q: Are you surprised you were elected president given your background?
A: No. This is Iran. Surprises happen. In this country, people decide and I am part of the people. Any young person if he works hard enough can reach pinnacles.
Q: Are you familiar with our Abraham Lincoln, who also came form a humble background?
A: Yes.
Q: Is there any foreign leader you identify with?
A: I am familiar with the history but I don't make personal statements regarding this.
Q: Do you have any message to Americans beyond the slogans you chant at demonstrations that say "Death to America?"
A: We do not have any problem with the people of the United States. If there was not the obstacle of the U.S. government, we were prepared to send assistance to the victims of Katrina. My government has decided to facilitate travel to the United States for Iranian nationals. I want a direct flight. We want peace and calm for all peoples of the world and human dignity for all people. For us, humanity is important. Nationality is not important. We believe that all humanity has the right to live in peace and dignity. Our criticism is targeted to a limited number in the ruling establishment.
American journalists come to Iran and they don't face any problems and they can meet all Iranian officials. It's not the same in the United States. They do not allow our journalists to go there and they put a lot of limitations on their activities.
Q: Would you allow American diplomats to come here to process visas so Iranians don't have to go to Dubai or Turkey?
A: The question of bilateral relations is dependent on a change of behavior. This is not a question you should ask me; you should ask the U.S. government. You can solve this problem through the interests section of the host country. The problem between the U.S. and Iran will not be solved through such gestures.
Q: Would you speak with our ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, who has authority to meet with Iranians?
A: When I said there is a possibility of negotiations, there are certain conditions that need to be realized. If these conditions are met, the form (of negotiations) is not important. The way they have treated our people here has left no ground for talks. They think no one can live without them and this is a wrong notion. We have proved we can live without them. As long as they take that overbearing position of strength and threats, nothing will happen.
Q: Is there anything the U.S. can say or do to change your mind?
A: They think they can solve everything with a bomb. The time for such things is long over. Today we have the rule of rationality and thought. For example, a president has asked a question about the Holocaust. So many questions and publicity that the president is a warmonger. I think the Americans still don't know what's happening in the world. They think in a world manufactured by themselves. They have given support to those who published the cartoons and this is not the right thing to do. This kind of defamation is an insult and will not contribute to the resolution of problems. The wave of disgust toward U.S. policies is increasing. They only recognize their own friends, not others. We have in this world 6 billion people. It's not an American club. The majority are not Americans and are not interested to be Americans.
Why should there be impositions on them? If there are clear principles, the world will be a better place.
Q: What did you think of New York when you were at the United Nations?
A: Unfortunately, I was very busy and I didn't find a time to have private conversation with people. Our comings and goings were limited. If I had an opportunity, I would meet the people.
Q: But didn't you form some impression from looking out the window of your car?
A: It's not the buildings that make the city, it's human relations. You have to see how people live with each other and how much they like and sympathize with each other. What is important is the soul of the city. Unfortunately, I was not able to contact that soul. I saw many tall buildings and cars but they are made of steel and concrete. They do not reflect the sentiments of the people and that only comes from direct encounters. But generally speaking, people are the same everywhere and New Yorkers are no exception. They like peace and justice and tranquility.
Source
A: If countries act on the basis of a set of principles, there can be common ground in many areas.
Q: As in Iraq?
A: If everyone is prepared to act on clear principles, there can be the possibility for common interests.
Q: You say you want Iran to progress but some of your comments have only further isolated the country. How can you progress if much of the world is opposed to Iran?
A: We are relying on the strength of our own people. The people of Iran have stood on their own feet throughout history and despite the bad intentions of their adversaries have been able to move forward.
Q: Don't you need Western investment to renovate your oil industry?
A: It is true but we are not going to compromise on our principles. There are many countries that are interested in working with us.
Q: Isn't it possible that you will face more economic sanctions?
A: It is true but these difficulties are the prelude to advancement. I believe those who want to impose limitations on us will lose more than us.
Q: Are you prepared for direct talks with the United States about the nuclear issue and other problems?
A: Iran is an Islamic country and as Muslims, the basis of our conduct is dialogue and rationality. Except for the occupiers of Jerusalem (Israel), we are prepared to talk to all countries of the world. But the United States has its own conditions. It wants to talk to other countries from a position of overbearing strength and that cannot be a good basis for constructive dialogue.
Q: Is there some signal the United States can send that it wants talks on an equal basis?
A: They have to take a hard look at their own behavior and ask themselves if they were in the place of other nations, what would they do. They choose to threaten us and make false allegations and they want to impose their lifestyle on others and this is not acceptable.
Q: You have made many promises to the Iranian people but how will you keep them? Are handouts sufficient to help the economy?
A: I am among the very rare few politicians that do not usually give promises. I have promised that I will work and we have a good and very coherent program for the advancement of our nation. Iran is a large country with very good human and financial resources. There is no program for just giving handouts.
Q: Foreign diplomats tell me that the brain drain is increasing and Iranian applications for visas for the West are up 20-50%?
A: The information I have is the contrary. There always has been travel back and forth.
Q: I hear that $200 billion in Iranian funds has fled to Dubai in recent months?
A: Those who have given that figure don't know the magnitude of $200 billion. We have relations with neighboring countries. There is investment back and forth. Dubai is a free trade area. It is natural that many Iranians go there to make investments. What is important is that the result of their work comes back to Iran. Last year, $8 billion was invested in the United Arab Emirates and $11 billion returned.
Q: Why do you say the things you do about Israel and the Holocaust when it only upsets people and further isolates Iran?
A: I don't know who is annoyed by revealing facts. But we know for sure that the people of Palestine are being killed every day with the Holocaust as a pretext, and the people of the region have been deprived of peace and security. One day they (the Israelis) used to utter the slogan of the "Nile to the Euphrates." It means they have a larger plan to aggress other nations of the region.
Q: But Israel withdrew from Gaza last September.
A: They had no choice. They were forced to. Isn't the question of Palestine the most important issue in the region?
Q: A lot of Iranians would say no.
A: Apart from those Iranians you mention, the most important problem facing the region is Palestine. This regime (Israel) was founded on the basis of propaganda regarding the Holocaust.
Q: Why don't you go to Auschwitz and see the gas chambers for yourself?
A: My going there will not solve the problem. I cannot take a trip back 60 years but researchers can do that.
Q: Would you accept the testimony of Holocaust survivors in Iran?
A: We accept them but an impartial group should (also) go there and investigate.
Q: But it's established historical fact that all those people died, the same way it is established fact that the CIA overthrew Prime Minister Mossadegh in 1953.
A: If we assume that is true, then the Westerners would have to pay the cost. Why should the people of Palestine pay the cost? If we provide the right answer to this question, the most important problem of the region will be solved. We want to find a fundamental solution to the problem. We believe if we can go to the root of the problem, security and peace will come to the region.
Q: I have met several of your childhood friends and they say you were a nice and studious kid and played soccer in a special way. But none of them voted for you. Why?
A: I don't know the background and I can't make a judgment. People are free to vote. We are all friends even those who haven't voted for me.
Q: Are you surprised you were elected president given your background?
A: No. This is Iran. Surprises happen. In this country, people decide and I am part of the people. Any young person if he works hard enough can reach pinnacles.
Q: Are you familiar with our Abraham Lincoln, who also came form a humble background?
A: Yes.
Q: Is there any foreign leader you identify with?
A: I am familiar with the history but I don't make personal statements regarding this.
Q: Do you have any message to Americans beyond the slogans you chant at demonstrations that say "Death to America?"
A: We do not have any problem with the people of the United States. If there was not the obstacle of the U.S. government, we were prepared to send assistance to the victims of Katrina. My government has decided to facilitate travel to the United States for Iranian nationals. I want a direct flight. We want peace and calm for all peoples of the world and human dignity for all people. For us, humanity is important. Nationality is not important. We believe that all humanity has the right to live in peace and dignity. Our criticism is targeted to a limited number in the ruling establishment.
American journalists come to Iran and they don't face any problems and they can meet all Iranian officials. It's not the same in the United States. They do not allow our journalists to go there and they put a lot of limitations on their activities.
Q: Would you allow American diplomats to come here to process visas so Iranians don't have to go to Dubai or Turkey?
A: The question of bilateral relations is dependent on a change of behavior. This is not a question you should ask me; you should ask the U.S. government. You can solve this problem through the interests section of the host country. The problem between the U.S. and Iran will not be solved through such gestures.
Q: Would you speak with our ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad, who has authority to meet with Iranians?
A: When I said there is a possibility of negotiations, there are certain conditions that need to be realized. If these conditions are met, the form (of negotiations) is not important. The way they have treated our people here has left no ground for talks. They think no one can live without them and this is a wrong notion. We have proved we can live without them. As long as they take that overbearing position of strength and threats, nothing will happen.
Q: Is there anything the U.S. can say or do to change your mind?
A: They think they can solve everything with a bomb. The time for such things is long over. Today we have the rule of rationality and thought. For example, a president has asked a question about the Holocaust. So many questions and publicity that the president is a warmonger. I think the Americans still don't know what's happening in the world. They think in a world manufactured by themselves. They have given support to those who published the cartoons and this is not the right thing to do. This kind of defamation is an insult and will not contribute to the resolution of problems. The wave of disgust toward U.S. policies is increasing. They only recognize their own friends, not others. We have in this world 6 billion people. It's not an American club. The majority are not Americans and are not interested to be Americans.
Why should there be impositions on them? If there are clear principles, the world will be a better place.
Q: What did you think of New York when you were at the United Nations?
A: Unfortunately, I was very busy and I didn't find a time to have private conversation with people. Our comings and goings were limited. If I had an opportunity, I would meet the people.
Q: But didn't you form some impression from looking out the window of your car?
A: It's not the buildings that make the city, it's human relations. You have to see how people live with each other and how much they like and sympathize with each other. What is important is the soul of the city. Unfortunately, I was not able to contact that soul. I saw many tall buildings and cars but they are made of steel and concrete. They do not reflect the sentiments of the people and that only comes from direct encounters. But generally speaking, people are the same everywhere and New Yorkers are no exception. They like peace and justice and tranquility.
Source
September 17, 2005
Speech at United Nations General Assembly (II)
In the Name of the God of Mercy, Compassion, Peace, Freedom and Justice
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today we have gathered here to exchange views about the world, its future and our common responsibilities towards it. It is evident that the future of the world is intertwined with its current state and the prevailing trends, which exhibit signs of both hope and despair.
On the one hand certain hopes and opportunities exist, and this august Assembly is convened on such hopes. Today human thought reflects outstanding commonalities which provide appropriate grounds to build upon. With the passing of the era of agnostic philosophies, today humanity is once again joined in celebrating monotheism and belief in the Creator as the originator of existence.
This is the common thread which binds us all. Faith will prove to be the solution to many of today's problems. The Truth will shine the light of faith and ethics on the life of human beings and prevent them from aggression, coercion and injustice and will guide them towards care and compassion for fellow beings.
Another hope is the common global appreciation of the sources of knowledge. Although reason, experience and science are among valuable sources of knowledge, the darkness of the Middle Ages deprived major portions of the Western world from appreciating them. This reactionary tendency deprived many from access to various scientific findings and knowledge and led to the exclusion of other sources of knowledge namely God and knowledge based on revelation from the life of human beings in the West; Divine knowledge that was carried and disseminated by such prophets as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad (peace be upon them). Today, agnostic thinking is on the decline and presently humanity is equally enamored with religion, science, knowledge and spirituality.
This is an auspicious beginning.
Divine prophets teach us about proper regard for the exalted state of human beings on earth. The human being is blessed with dignity, most importantly manifested in being the viceroy of the Almighty on earth. The Almighty placed humans on earth to develop it, institutionalize justice, overcome their egoistic tendencies and praise no lord but the Almighty. Faith and good deeds can bring deliverance and the good life even in this world. Attaining this depend on human will, that is the will of each and every one of us. We must heed the call of our common primordial nature and achieve the realization of this good life.
On the other hand, the prevalence of military domination, increasing poverty, the growing gap between rich and poor countries, violence as a means to solve crises, spread of terrorism, especially state terrorism, existence and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the pervasive lack of honesty in interstate relations, and disregard for the equal rights of peoples and nations in international relations, constitute some of the challenges and threats.
Although these challenges are very real, we believe we are not predestined to experience them. Our common will not only can change this course but in fact can lead us to a life filled with hope and prosperity. Divine revelation teaches us that "The Almighty changes the fate of no people unless they themselves show a will for change" (Holy Qur'an, 13:11).
How can we influence the future of the world?
When and how will peace, tranquility and well-being for all come about?
These are the fundamental questions before us.
We believe that a sustainable order – nurturing and flourishing peace and tranquility – can only be realized on the two pillars of justice and spirituality. The more human society departs from justice and spirituality, the greater insecurity it will face, so much so that a relatively small crisis – such as a natural disaster – leads to various abnormalities and inhuman behavior.
Unfortunately, the world is rife with discrimination and poverty.
Discrimination produces hatred, war and terrorism. They all share the common root of lack of spirituality coupled with injustice.
Justice is about equal rights, the correct distribution of resources in the territories of different states, the equality of all before the law and respect for international agreements. Justice recognizes the right of everyone to tranquility, peace and a dignified life. Justice rejects intimidation and double standards. As the eminent daughter of the Prophet of Islam has said, "justice brings tranquility and harmony to our hearts."
Today, the world is longing for the establishment of such justice. If humanity heeds the call of its primordial nature with firm resolve, justice will emerge. This is what the Almighty has promised and all people of good will from all religions are waiting for. If the prevailing discourse of global relations becomes one of justice and spirituality, then durable peace will be guaranteed. Conversely, if international relations are defined without justice and spirituality and void of moral considerations, then the mechanisms for promoting confidence and peace will remain insufficient and ineffective.
If some, relying on their superior military and economic might, attempt to expand their rights and privileges, they will be performing a great disservice to the cause of peace and in fact will fuel the arms race and spread insecurity, fear and deception. If global trends continue to serve the interests of small influential groups, even the interests of the citizens of powerful countries will be jeopardized — as was seen in the recent crises and even a natural disaster such as the recent tragic hurricane.
Today, my nation calls on other nations and governments to "move forward to a durable tranquility and peace based on justice and spirituality."
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Islamic Republic of Iran is born out of a movement, based on the pure primordial nature of a people who rose up to regain their dignity, esteem and human rights. The Islamic Revolution toppled a regime which had been put in place through a coup and supported by those who claim to be advocates of democracy and human rights but thwarted the aspirations of the nation for development and progress for 25 years through intimidation and torture of the populace and submission and subservience to outsiders.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is the manifestation of true democracy in the region. The discourse of the Iranian nation is focused on respect for the rights of human beings and a quest for tranquility, peace, justice and development for all through monotheism.
For 8 years, Saddam's regime imposed a massive war of aggression and occupation on my people. It employed the most heinous weapons of mass destruction — including chemical weapons — against Iranians and Iraqis alike.
Who, in fact, armed Saddam with these weapons? What was the reaction of those who now claim to fight against WMDs regarding the use of chemical weapons back then? The world is witness to the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran, because of its humanitarian principles, even during the most testing of times and when it was sustaining the highest number of casualties, never allowed itself to use such weapons.
Thousands of nuclear warheads that are stockpiled in various locations coupled with programs to further develop these inhuman weapons have created a new atmosphere of repression and the rule of the machines of war, threatening the international community and even the citizens of the countries that possess them.
Ironically, those who have actually used nuclear weapons, continue to produce, stockpile and extensively test such weapons, have used depleted uranium bombs and bullets against tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Kuwaitis, and even their own soldiers and those of their allies, afflicting them with incurable diseases, blatantly violated their obligations under the NPT, have refrained from signing the CTBT and have armed the Zionist occupation regime with WMDs, are not only refusing to remedy their past deeds, but in clear breech of the NPT are trying to prevent other countries from acquiring the technology to produce peaceful nuclear energy.
All these problems emanate from the fact that justice and spirituality are missing in the way powerful governments conduct their affairs with other nations.
After September 11, a particular radical group was accused of terrorist activities -- although it was never explained how such huge intelligence gathering and security organizations failed to prevent such an extensive and well planned operation.
Why powers that, not so long ago, were supporting the activities of such groups in Afghanistan — and thus portraying themselves as supporters of human rights and the Afghan people — have overnight turned into their most fierce critic?
Are we to believe that their benefactors, i.e. the very same hegemonic powers have lost control?
If the answer is yes, would it not be better for those powers to adopt an honest and transparent approach to the international community, provide precise information about the main elements and their arms and financial support system, and accept responsibility for their inhuman actions against nations and countries, and thereby assist peoples and nations to correctly, wisely and sincerely fight the roots of terrorism.
We must endeavor to achieve stainable tranquility and peace based on justice and spirituality.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Terrorism and WMDs are two major threats before the international community. The Islamic Republic of Iran, as one of the main victims of terrorism and chemical weapons, fully appreciates the difficulties that lie ahead in the road to combat these menaces. Today, the most serious challenge is that the culprits are arrogating to themselves the role of the prosecutor. Even more dangerous is that certain parties relying on their power and wealth try to impose a climate of intimidation and injustice over the world by bullying, while — through their huge media resources — portray themselves as defenders of freedom, democracy and human rights.
People around the world are fully aware of what is happening in the occupied Palestine. Women and children are being murdered and adolescents taken prisoner. Houses are being demolished and farms burnt down. Yet, when the people of Palestine resist these conditions, they are accused of terrorism. At the same time, the occupier, which does not abide by any principles and terror is part of its pronounced and routine policy enjoys the support of the previously mentioned governments. Let me be blunter. State terrorism is being supported by those who claim to fight terrorism.
How can one talk about human rights and at the same time blatantly deny many the inalienable right to have access to science and technology with applications in medicine, industry and energy and through force and intimidation hinder their progress and development?
Can nations be deprived of scientific and technological progress through the threat of use of force and based on mere allegations of possibility of military diversion? We believe that all countries and nations are entitled to technological and scientific advancement in all fields, particularly the peaceful technology to produce nuclear fuel. Such access cannot be restricted to a few, depriving most nations, and by establishing economic monopolies, use it as an instrument to expand their domination.
We have gathered here to defend human rights in accordance with Charter of UN and prevent certain powers from claiming that "some countries have more rights" or that "some countries do not have the right to enjoy their legitimate rights."
We must not, at the beginning of the 21st century, revert to the logic of the dark ages and once again try to deny societies access to scientific and technological advances.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The UN must be the symbol of democracy and the equal rights of nations. If we talk about the equal rights of nations in political forums, we must talk of the same concept in this forum as well. Similarly, if we talk about the right of sovereignty, then all nations must be allowed to exercise their rights on an equal footing and in a democratic process.
The UN can be the standard bearer of democracy in the world when it, itself, is a manifestation of democratic process.
I reiterate that durable tranquility and peace can only be built on justice and spirituality.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a symbol of true democracy. All officials including the Leader, President, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, city and village councils are elected through the vote of the citizens. The Islamic Republic of Iran has held 27 national elections in 27 years. This showcases a vibrant and dynamic society in which people widely participate in the political life.
Because of its key importance and influence in the important and strategic Middle East region, the Islamic Republic of Iran is committed to contribute actively to the promotion of peace and stability in the region.
Saddam and Taliban regimes were both the products of foreign powers. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq know very well who supported these two regimes.
Today, to establish peace and security in the region, foreign occupation forces must leave and completely hand over the political and economic sovereignty of these two countries to their peoples.
The Islamic Republic of Iran will continue to provide full and comprehensive support to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan and their elected governments, and will actively help them in the establishment of order and security. My country will continue and expand its sincere cooperation and interaction with them.
In Palestine, a durable peace will be possible through justice, an end to discrimination and the occupation of Palestinian land, the return of all Palestinian refugees, and the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital.
Mr. President; Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today, more than ever, nations need constructive, positive and honest cooperation and interaction in order to enjoy a dignified, tranquil and peaceful life based on justice and spirituality. Let us enter into a collective covenant to realize this legitimate aspiration of our nations.
Here, I would like to briefly talk about the approach and initiative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on the nuclear issue.
Nuclear weapons and their proliferation, and attempts to impose an apartheid regime on access to peaceful nuclear energy, are two major threats, challenging international tranquility and peace.
Keeping in mind that in past years no serious efforts – complemented by practical mechanisms - have been made to move towards full disarmament and more specifically implement the decisions and outcomes of the NPT Review Conferences of 1995 and 2000, I suggest that the General Assembly, as the most inclusive UN organ, mandate an ad-hoc committee to compile and submit a comprehensive report on possible practical mechanisms and strategies for complete disarmament.
This Committee should also be asked to investigate as to how – contrary to the NPT - material, technology and equipment for nuclear weapons were transferred to the Zionist regime, and to propose practical measures for the establishment of a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
Some powerful states practice a discriminatory approach against access of NPT members to material, equipment, and peaceful nuclear technology, and by doing so, intend to impose a nuclear apartheid. We are concerned that once certain powerful states completely control nuclear energy resources and technology, they will deny access to other states and thus deepen the divide between powerful countries and the rest of the international community. When that happens, we will be divided into light and dark countries.
Regrettably, in the past 30 years, no effective measure has been implemented to facilitate the exercise of the legally recognized right of NPT state parties to have access to and use peaceful nuclear energy in accordance with article IV. Therefore, the General Assembly should ask the IAEA – in accordance with article 2 of its Statute – to report on violations by specific countries that have hindered the implementation of the above article and also produce practical strategies for its renewed implementation.
What needs our particular attention is the fact that peaceful use of nuclear energy without possession of nuclear fuel cycle is an empty proposition. Nuclear power plants can indeed lead to total dependence of countries and peoples if they need to rely for their fuel on coercive powers, who do not refrain from any measure in furtherance of their interests. No popularly elected and responsible government can consider such a situation in the interest of its people. The history of dependence on oil in oil rich countries under domination is an experiment that no independent country is willing to repeat.
Those hegemonic powers, who consider scientific and technological progress of independent and free nations as a challenge to their monopoly on these important instruments of power and who do not want to see such achievements in other countries, have misrepresented Iran's healthy and fully safeguarded technological endeavors in the nuclear field as pursuit of nuclear weapons. This is nothing but a propaganda ploy. The Islamic Republic of Iran is presenting in good faith its proposal for constructive interaction and a just dialogue. However, if some try to impose their will on the Iranian people through resort to a language of force and threat with Iran, we will reconsider our entire approach to the nuclear issue.
Allow me, as the elected President of the Iranian people, to outline the other main elements of my country's initiative regarding the nuclear issue:
1. The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its previously and repeatedly declared position that in accordance with our religious principles, pursuit of nuclear weapons is prohibited.
2. The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that it is necessary to revitalize the NPT and create the above-mentioned ad-hoc committee so that it can combat nuclear weapons and abolish the apartheid in peaceful nuclear technology.
3. Technically, the fuel cycle of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not different from that of other countries which have peaceful nuclear technology. Therefore, as a further confidence building measure and in order to provide the greatest degree of transparency, the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to engage in serious partnership with private and public sectors of other countries in the implementation of uranium enrichment program in Iran. This represents the most far reaching step, outside all requirements of the NPT, being proposed by Iran as a further confidence building measure.
4. In keeping with Iran's inalienable right to have access to a nuclear fuel cycle, continued interaction and technical and legal cooperation with the IAEA will be the centerpiece of our nuclear policy. Initiation and continuation of negotiations with other countries will be carried out in the context of Iran's interaction with the Agency. With this in mind, I have directed the relevant Iranian officials to compile the legal and technical details of Iran's nuclear approach, based on the following considerations:
4.1. International precedence tells us that nuclear fuel- delivery contracts are unreliable and no legally binding international document or instrument exists to guarantee the delivery of nuclear fuel. On many occasions such bilateral contracts have either been suspended or stopped altogether for political reasons. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, in its pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology, considers it within its legitimate rights to receive objective guarantees for uranium enrichment in the nuclear fuel cycle.
4.2. In its negotiations with the EU3, Iran has tried in earnest to prove the solid and rightful foundations of its nuclear activity in the context of the NPT, and to establish mutual trust. The selection of our negotiating partners and the continuation of negotiations with the EU3 will be commensurate with the requirements of our cooperation with the Agency regarding nondiversion of the process of uranium enrichment to non-peaceful purposes in the framework of the provisions of the NPT. In this context, several proposals have been presented which can be considered in the context of negotiations. The Islamic Republic of Iran appreciates the positive contribution of South Africa and H.E. President Mbeki personally in the resolution of the nuclear issue, and cognizant of South Africa's active role in the IAEA Board of Governors would welcome its active participation in the negotiations.
4.3. The discriminatory approaches regarding the NPT that focuses on the obligations of state-parties and disregards their rights under the Treaty should be discontinued.
As the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, I assure you that my country will use everything in its power to contribute to global tranquility and peace based on the two maxims of spirituality and justice as well as the equal rights of all peoples and nations. My country will interact and cooperate constructively with the international community to face the challenges before us.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
From the beginning of time, humanity has longed for the day when justice, peace, equality and compassion envelop the world. All of us can contribute to the establishment of such a world. When that day comes, the ultimate promise of all Divine religions will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being who is heir to all prophets and pious men. He will lead the world to justice and absolut peace.
O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace. O Lord, include us among his companions, followers and those who serve his cause.
Source
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today we have gathered here to exchange views about the world, its future and our common responsibilities towards it. It is evident that the future of the world is intertwined with its current state and the prevailing trends, which exhibit signs of both hope and despair.
On the one hand certain hopes and opportunities exist, and this august Assembly is convened on such hopes. Today human thought reflects outstanding commonalities which provide appropriate grounds to build upon. With the passing of the era of agnostic philosophies, today humanity is once again joined in celebrating monotheism and belief in the Creator as the originator of existence.
This is the common thread which binds us all. Faith will prove to be the solution to many of today's problems. The Truth will shine the light of faith and ethics on the life of human beings and prevent them from aggression, coercion and injustice and will guide them towards care and compassion for fellow beings.
Another hope is the common global appreciation of the sources of knowledge. Although reason, experience and science are among valuable sources of knowledge, the darkness of the Middle Ages deprived major portions of the Western world from appreciating them. This reactionary tendency deprived many from access to various scientific findings and knowledge and led to the exclusion of other sources of knowledge namely God and knowledge based on revelation from the life of human beings in the West; Divine knowledge that was carried and disseminated by such prophets as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad (peace be upon them). Today, agnostic thinking is on the decline and presently humanity is equally enamored with religion, science, knowledge and spirituality.
This is an auspicious beginning.
Divine prophets teach us about proper regard for the exalted state of human beings on earth. The human being is blessed with dignity, most importantly manifested in being the viceroy of the Almighty on earth. The Almighty placed humans on earth to develop it, institutionalize justice, overcome their egoistic tendencies and praise no lord but the Almighty. Faith and good deeds can bring deliverance and the good life even in this world. Attaining this depend on human will, that is the will of each and every one of us. We must heed the call of our common primordial nature and achieve the realization of this good life.
On the other hand, the prevalence of military domination, increasing poverty, the growing gap between rich and poor countries, violence as a means to solve crises, spread of terrorism, especially state terrorism, existence and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the pervasive lack of honesty in interstate relations, and disregard for the equal rights of peoples and nations in international relations, constitute some of the challenges and threats.
Although these challenges are very real, we believe we are not predestined to experience them. Our common will not only can change this course but in fact can lead us to a life filled with hope and prosperity. Divine revelation teaches us that "The Almighty changes the fate of no people unless they themselves show a will for change" (Holy Qur'an, 13:11).
How can we influence the future of the world?
When and how will peace, tranquility and well-being for all come about?
These are the fundamental questions before us.
We believe that a sustainable order – nurturing and flourishing peace and tranquility – can only be realized on the two pillars of justice and spirituality. The more human society departs from justice and spirituality, the greater insecurity it will face, so much so that a relatively small crisis – such as a natural disaster – leads to various abnormalities and inhuman behavior.
Unfortunately, the world is rife with discrimination and poverty.
Discrimination produces hatred, war and terrorism. They all share the common root of lack of spirituality coupled with injustice.
Justice is about equal rights, the correct distribution of resources in the territories of different states, the equality of all before the law and respect for international agreements. Justice recognizes the right of everyone to tranquility, peace and a dignified life. Justice rejects intimidation and double standards. As the eminent daughter of the Prophet of Islam has said, "justice brings tranquility and harmony to our hearts."
Today, the world is longing for the establishment of such justice. If humanity heeds the call of its primordial nature with firm resolve, justice will emerge. This is what the Almighty has promised and all people of good will from all religions are waiting for. If the prevailing discourse of global relations becomes one of justice and spirituality, then durable peace will be guaranteed. Conversely, if international relations are defined without justice and spirituality and void of moral considerations, then the mechanisms for promoting confidence and peace will remain insufficient and ineffective.
If some, relying on their superior military and economic might, attempt to expand their rights and privileges, they will be performing a great disservice to the cause of peace and in fact will fuel the arms race and spread insecurity, fear and deception. If global trends continue to serve the interests of small influential groups, even the interests of the citizens of powerful countries will be jeopardized — as was seen in the recent crises and even a natural disaster such as the recent tragic hurricane.
Today, my nation calls on other nations and governments to "move forward to a durable tranquility and peace based on justice and spirituality."
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Islamic Republic of Iran is born out of a movement, based on the pure primordial nature of a people who rose up to regain their dignity, esteem and human rights. The Islamic Revolution toppled a regime which had been put in place through a coup and supported by those who claim to be advocates of democracy and human rights but thwarted the aspirations of the nation for development and progress for 25 years through intimidation and torture of the populace and submission and subservience to outsiders.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is the manifestation of true democracy in the region. The discourse of the Iranian nation is focused on respect for the rights of human beings and a quest for tranquility, peace, justice and development for all through monotheism.
For 8 years, Saddam's regime imposed a massive war of aggression and occupation on my people. It employed the most heinous weapons of mass destruction — including chemical weapons — against Iranians and Iraqis alike.
Who, in fact, armed Saddam with these weapons? What was the reaction of those who now claim to fight against WMDs regarding the use of chemical weapons back then? The world is witness to the fact that the Islamic Republic of Iran, because of its humanitarian principles, even during the most testing of times and when it was sustaining the highest number of casualties, never allowed itself to use such weapons.
Thousands of nuclear warheads that are stockpiled in various locations coupled with programs to further develop these inhuman weapons have created a new atmosphere of repression and the rule of the machines of war, threatening the international community and even the citizens of the countries that possess them.
Ironically, those who have actually used nuclear weapons, continue to produce, stockpile and extensively test such weapons, have used depleted uranium bombs and bullets against tens and perhaps hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, Kuwaitis, and even their own soldiers and those of their allies, afflicting them with incurable diseases, blatantly violated their obligations under the NPT, have refrained from signing the CTBT and have armed the Zionist occupation regime with WMDs, are not only refusing to remedy their past deeds, but in clear breech of the NPT are trying to prevent other countries from acquiring the technology to produce peaceful nuclear energy.
All these problems emanate from the fact that justice and spirituality are missing in the way powerful governments conduct their affairs with other nations.
After September 11, a particular radical group was accused of terrorist activities -- although it was never explained how such huge intelligence gathering and security organizations failed to prevent such an extensive and well planned operation.
Why powers that, not so long ago, were supporting the activities of such groups in Afghanistan — and thus portraying themselves as supporters of human rights and the Afghan people — have overnight turned into their most fierce critic?
Are we to believe that their benefactors, i.e. the very same hegemonic powers have lost control?
If the answer is yes, would it not be better for those powers to adopt an honest and transparent approach to the international community, provide precise information about the main elements and their arms and financial support system, and accept responsibility for their inhuman actions against nations and countries, and thereby assist peoples and nations to correctly, wisely and sincerely fight the roots of terrorism.
We must endeavor to achieve stainable tranquility and peace based on justice and spirituality.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Terrorism and WMDs are two major threats before the international community. The Islamic Republic of Iran, as one of the main victims of terrorism and chemical weapons, fully appreciates the difficulties that lie ahead in the road to combat these menaces. Today, the most serious challenge is that the culprits are arrogating to themselves the role of the prosecutor. Even more dangerous is that certain parties relying on their power and wealth try to impose a climate of intimidation and injustice over the world by bullying, while — through their huge media resources — portray themselves as defenders of freedom, democracy and human rights.
People around the world are fully aware of what is happening in the occupied Palestine. Women and children are being murdered and adolescents taken prisoner. Houses are being demolished and farms burnt down. Yet, when the people of Palestine resist these conditions, they are accused of terrorism. At the same time, the occupier, which does not abide by any principles and terror is part of its pronounced and routine policy enjoys the support of the previously mentioned governments. Let me be blunter. State terrorism is being supported by those who claim to fight terrorism.
How can one talk about human rights and at the same time blatantly deny many the inalienable right to have access to science and technology with applications in medicine, industry and energy and through force and intimidation hinder their progress and development?
Can nations be deprived of scientific and technological progress through the threat of use of force and based on mere allegations of possibility of military diversion? We believe that all countries and nations are entitled to technological and scientific advancement in all fields, particularly the peaceful technology to produce nuclear fuel. Such access cannot be restricted to a few, depriving most nations, and by establishing economic monopolies, use it as an instrument to expand their domination.
We have gathered here to defend human rights in accordance with Charter of UN and prevent certain powers from claiming that "some countries have more rights" or that "some countries do not have the right to enjoy their legitimate rights."
We must not, at the beginning of the 21st century, revert to the logic of the dark ages and once again try to deny societies access to scientific and technological advances.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The UN must be the symbol of democracy and the equal rights of nations. If we talk about the equal rights of nations in political forums, we must talk of the same concept in this forum as well. Similarly, if we talk about the right of sovereignty, then all nations must be allowed to exercise their rights on an equal footing and in a democratic process.
The UN can be the standard bearer of democracy in the world when it, itself, is a manifestation of democratic process.
I reiterate that durable tranquility and peace can only be built on justice and spirituality.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
The Islamic Republic of Iran is a symbol of true democracy. All officials including the Leader, President, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, city and village councils are elected through the vote of the citizens. The Islamic Republic of Iran has held 27 national elections in 27 years. This showcases a vibrant and dynamic society in which people widely participate in the political life.
Because of its key importance and influence in the important and strategic Middle East region, the Islamic Republic of Iran is committed to contribute actively to the promotion of peace and stability in the region.
Saddam and Taliban regimes were both the products of foreign powers. The people of Afghanistan and Iraq know very well who supported these two regimes.
Today, to establish peace and security in the region, foreign occupation forces must leave and completely hand over the political and economic sovereignty of these two countries to their peoples.
The Islamic Republic of Iran will continue to provide full and comprehensive support to the people of Iraq and Afghanistan and their elected governments, and will actively help them in the establishment of order and security. My country will continue and expand its sincere cooperation and interaction with them.
In Palestine, a durable peace will be possible through justice, an end to discrimination and the occupation of Palestinian land, the return of all Palestinian refugees, and the establishment of a democratic Palestinian state with Al-Quds Al-Sharif as its capital.
Mr. President; Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
Today, more than ever, nations need constructive, positive and honest cooperation and interaction in order to enjoy a dignified, tranquil and peaceful life based on justice and spirituality. Let us enter into a collective covenant to realize this legitimate aspiration of our nations.
Here, I would like to briefly talk about the approach and initiative of the Islamic Republic of Iran on the nuclear issue.
Nuclear weapons and their proliferation, and attempts to impose an apartheid regime on access to peaceful nuclear energy, are two major threats, challenging international tranquility and peace.
Keeping in mind that in past years no serious efforts – complemented by practical mechanisms - have been made to move towards full disarmament and more specifically implement the decisions and outcomes of the NPT Review Conferences of 1995 and 2000, I suggest that the General Assembly, as the most inclusive UN organ, mandate an ad-hoc committee to compile and submit a comprehensive report on possible practical mechanisms and strategies for complete disarmament.
This Committee should also be asked to investigate as to how – contrary to the NPT - material, technology and equipment for nuclear weapons were transferred to the Zionist regime, and to propose practical measures for the establishment of a nuclear-weapons-free zone in the Middle East.
Some powerful states practice a discriminatory approach against access of NPT members to material, equipment, and peaceful nuclear technology, and by doing so, intend to impose a nuclear apartheid. We are concerned that once certain powerful states completely control nuclear energy resources and technology, they will deny access to other states and thus deepen the divide between powerful countries and the rest of the international community. When that happens, we will be divided into light and dark countries.
Regrettably, in the past 30 years, no effective measure has been implemented to facilitate the exercise of the legally recognized right of NPT state parties to have access to and use peaceful nuclear energy in accordance with article IV. Therefore, the General Assembly should ask the IAEA – in accordance with article 2 of its Statute – to report on violations by specific countries that have hindered the implementation of the above article and also produce practical strategies for its renewed implementation.
What needs our particular attention is the fact that peaceful use of nuclear energy without possession of nuclear fuel cycle is an empty proposition. Nuclear power plants can indeed lead to total dependence of countries and peoples if they need to rely for their fuel on coercive powers, who do not refrain from any measure in furtherance of their interests. No popularly elected and responsible government can consider such a situation in the interest of its people. The history of dependence on oil in oil rich countries under domination is an experiment that no independent country is willing to repeat.
Those hegemonic powers, who consider scientific and technological progress of independent and free nations as a challenge to their monopoly on these important instruments of power and who do not want to see such achievements in other countries, have misrepresented Iran's healthy and fully safeguarded technological endeavors in the nuclear field as pursuit of nuclear weapons. This is nothing but a propaganda ploy. The Islamic Republic of Iran is presenting in good faith its proposal for constructive interaction and a just dialogue. However, if some try to impose their will on the Iranian people through resort to a language of force and threat with Iran, we will reconsider our entire approach to the nuclear issue.
Allow me, as the elected President of the Iranian people, to outline the other main elements of my country's initiative regarding the nuclear issue:
1. The Islamic Republic of Iran reiterates its previously and repeatedly declared position that in accordance with our religious principles, pursuit of nuclear weapons is prohibited.
2. The Islamic Republic of Iran believes that it is necessary to revitalize the NPT and create the above-mentioned ad-hoc committee so that it can combat nuclear weapons and abolish the apartheid in peaceful nuclear technology.
3. Technically, the fuel cycle of the Islamic Republic of Iran is not different from that of other countries which have peaceful nuclear technology. Therefore, as a further confidence building measure and in order to provide the greatest degree of transparency, the Islamic Republic of Iran is prepared to engage in serious partnership with private and public sectors of other countries in the implementation of uranium enrichment program in Iran. This represents the most far reaching step, outside all requirements of the NPT, being proposed by Iran as a further confidence building measure.
4. In keeping with Iran's inalienable right to have access to a nuclear fuel cycle, continued interaction and technical and legal cooperation with the IAEA will be the centerpiece of our nuclear policy. Initiation and continuation of negotiations with other countries will be carried out in the context of Iran's interaction with the Agency. With this in mind, I have directed the relevant Iranian officials to compile the legal and technical details of Iran's nuclear approach, based on the following considerations:
4.1. International precedence tells us that nuclear fuel- delivery contracts are unreliable and no legally binding international document or instrument exists to guarantee the delivery of nuclear fuel. On many occasions such bilateral contracts have either been suspended or stopped altogether for political reasons. Therefore, the Islamic Republic of Iran, in its pursuit of peaceful nuclear technology, considers it within its legitimate rights to receive objective guarantees for uranium enrichment in the nuclear fuel cycle.
4.2. In its negotiations with the EU3, Iran has tried in earnest to prove the solid and rightful foundations of its nuclear activity in the context of the NPT, and to establish mutual trust. The selection of our negotiating partners and the continuation of negotiations with the EU3 will be commensurate with the requirements of our cooperation with the Agency regarding nondiversion of the process of uranium enrichment to non-peaceful purposes in the framework of the provisions of the NPT. In this context, several proposals have been presented which can be considered in the context of negotiations. The Islamic Republic of Iran appreciates the positive contribution of South Africa and H.E. President Mbeki personally in the resolution of the nuclear issue, and cognizant of South Africa's active role in the IAEA Board of Governors would welcome its active participation in the negotiations.
4.3. The discriminatory approaches regarding the NPT that focuses on the obligations of state-parties and disregards their rights under the Treaty should be discontinued.
As the President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, I assure you that my country will use everything in its power to contribute to global tranquility and peace based on the two maxims of spirituality and justice as well as the equal rights of all peoples and nations. My country will interact and cooperate constructively with the international community to face the challenges before us.
Dear Friends and Colleagues,
From the beginning of time, humanity has longed for the day when justice, peace, equality and compassion envelop the world. All of us can contribute to the establishment of such a world. When that day comes, the ultimate promise of all Divine religions will be fulfilled with the emergence of a perfect human being who is heir to all prophets and pious men. He will lead the world to justice and absolut peace.
O mighty Lord, I pray to you to hasten the emergence of your last repository, the promised one, that perfect and pure human being, the one that will fill this world with justice and peace. O Lord, include us among his companions, followers and those who serve his cause.
Source
September 14, 2005
Speech at United Nations General Assembly (I)
In the Name of God, who based His creation of the heavens and earth on the principle of justice, and who founded the sustentation and propriety of human affairs on it; the God who commanded human beings to cooperate in the path of righteousness and betterment and avoid ill-will, transgression and enmity; the God who guided great prophets, including Moses and Jesus and the last of the prophets, Mohammad (peace be upon them all) as well as all God-seeking and well-intentioned reformers to strive to establish justice and exalt the human status.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen
At the outset, I wish to express my pleasure at participating in this august gathering of colleagues, distinguished Heads of States and Governments and esteemed delegates. May I also register my deepest grief over the tragic incidents in Kadhemieh (Iraq) and hurricane Katrina, and also express my condolences and sympathies to the victims and their loved ones.
The United Nations must be the focal point of reliance, hope and participation for all peoples and governments, and a forum for dialogue, understanding and cooperation to achieve peace and tranquility throughout the globe. Attainment of this objective requires:
1. Justice must reign supreme in the Organization, and in accordance with its Charter, all Member-States must have equal rights. Greater power or wealth should not accord expanded rights to any member.
2. The principles of democracy and ethics should prevail in all organs and functions of the United Nations, so that the Organization could become a manifestation of the prevalence of these two commonly shared values.
3. The United Nations should endeavor to fulfill its responsibility to promote and institutionalize justice at the international level.
4. The host country should not enjoy any right or privilege over the rest of the membership and the Organization and its headquarters must be easily accessible for all.
In recognition of these principles, the following will become essential:
1. The greatest challenge of our age is the gradual spiritual depravation of human beings brought about by the distancing of the prevailing order from morality and unity of monotheism. The United Nations should lead in promotion of spirituality and compassion for humanity. Only through this, uniting of nations can in fact be realized.
2. Acceptance of unilateralism is exactly the negation of the United Nations and its raison d'etre. Therefore, the United Nations, in its entity, should confront this vicious malady.
3. Today, the physical and psychological security of peoples and nations is ever more endangered. Unilateralism, production and use of weapons of mass destruction, intimidation, resort to the threat or use of force and imposition of destructive wars on peoples for the sake of security and prosperity of a few powers have indeed redoubled the historic responsibility of the United Nations to resolutely endeavor to institutionalize justice in all aspects of global interactions in the interest of human tranquility. In our view, it is impossible to achieve security, peace, stability, prosperity and progress in parts of the world at the expense of instability, militarism, discrimination, poverty and deprivation in others.
4. The raison d'etre of the United Nations is to promote global peace and tranquility. Therefore, any license for pre-emptive measures -- which are essentially based on gauging intentions rather than objective facts and are in fact a modern manifestation of interventionist and war-mongering tendencies of the past -- is in blatant contradiction to the very foundations of the United Nations and the letter and spirit of its Charter.
5. The composition of the Security Council must gain a logical and democratic balance. If permanent membership is accepted for some, then an acceptable mix of representatives of all continents and major civilizations must acquire permanent seats in the Council. I wish to underline our deep dismay that over fifty Islamic countries encompassing more than one 1.2 billion people do not have a permanent seat in the Security Council, nor does Africa with its huge capabilities and potentials, and that the vast continent of Asia with its ancient civilizations has only one permanent seat.
6. The United Nations must have the possibility to enable all governments, civil society organizations and NGOs from all over the world to freely travel to its headquarters without the selective hindrances of the host country and to engage without any fear in serious dialogue.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
In our view, these concerns can only be met if the prevailing discourse in international relations is transformed from one based on violence, discrimination and domination to a discourse of peace and global stability based on justice and spirituality through dialogue, compassion and respect for human beings. The exalted Prophet of Islam says: "the highest state of wisdom, after faith in God, is seeking friendship with people and extending a helping hand to all fellow human beings." These words of wisdom underline the fact that the entire globe is but one body and the pain and ailment of each part disturbs the tranquility of all. In the words of a famous Iranian poet of the thirteenth century:
All human beings are members of one frame
Since all, at first, from the same essence came.
When time afflicts a limb with pain
The other limbs cannot at rest remain.
Source
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen
At the outset, I wish to express my pleasure at participating in this august gathering of colleagues, distinguished Heads of States and Governments and esteemed delegates. May I also register my deepest grief over the tragic incidents in Kadhemieh (Iraq) and hurricane Katrina, and also express my condolences and sympathies to the victims and their loved ones.
The United Nations must be the focal point of reliance, hope and participation for all peoples and governments, and a forum for dialogue, understanding and cooperation to achieve peace and tranquility throughout the globe. Attainment of this objective requires:
1. Justice must reign supreme in the Organization, and in accordance with its Charter, all Member-States must have equal rights. Greater power or wealth should not accord expanded rights to any member.
2. The principles of democracy and ethics should prevail in all organs and functions of the United Nations, so that the Organization could become a manifestation of the prevalence of these two commonly shared values.
3. The United Nations should endeavor to fulfill its responsibility to promote and institutionalize justice at the international level.
4. The host country should not enjoy any right or privilege over the rest of the membership and the Organization and its headquarters must be easily accessible for all.
In recognition of these principles, the following will become essential:
1. The greatest challenge of our age is the gradual spiritual depravation of human beings brought about by the distancing of the prevailing order from morality and unity of monotheism. The United Nations should lead in promotion of spirituality and compassion for humanity. Only through this, uniting of nations can in fact be realized.
2. Acceptance of unilateralism is exactly the negation of the United Nations and its raison d'etre. Therefore, the United Nations, in its entity, should confront this vicious malady.
3. Today, the physical and psychological security of peoples and nations is ever more endangered. Unilateralism, production and use of weapons of mass destruction, intimidation, resort to the threat or use of force and imposition of destructive wars on peoples for the sake of security and prosperity of a few powers have indeed redoubled the historic responsibility of the United Nations to resolutely endeavor to institutionalize justice in all aspects of global interactions in the interest of human tranquility. In our view, it is impossible to achieve security, peace, stability, prosperity and progress in parts of the world at the expense of instability, militarism, discrimination, poverty and deprivation in others.
4. The raison d'etre of the United Nations is to promote global peace and tranquility. Therefore, any license for pre-emptive measures -- which are essentially based on gauging intentions rather than objective facts and are in fact a modern manifestation of interventionist and war-mongering tendencies of the past -- is in blatant contradiction to the very foundations of the United Nations and the letter and spirit of its Charter.
5. The composition of the Security Council must gain a logical and democratic balance. If permanent membership is accepted for some, then an acceptable mix of representatives of all continents and major civilizations must acquire permanent seats in the Council. I wish to underline our deep dismay that over fifty Islamic countries encompassing more than one 1.2 billion people do not have a permanent seat in the Security Council, nor does Africa with its huge capabilities and potentials, and that the vast continent of Asia with its ancient civilizations has only one permanent seat.
6. The United Nations must have the possibility to enable all governments, civil society organizations and NGOs from all over the world to freely travel to its headquarters without the selective hindrances of the host country and to engage without any fear in serious dialogue.
Mr. President, Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen,
In our view, these concerns can only be met if the prevailing discourse in international relations is transformed from one based on violence, discrimination and domination to a discourse of peace and global stability based on justice and spirituality through dialogue, compassion and respect for human beings. The exalted Prophet of Islam says: "the highest state of wisdom, after faith in God, is seeking friendship with people and extending a helping hand to all fellow human beings." These words of wisdom underline the fact that the entire globe is but one body and the pain and ailment of each part disturbs the tranquility of all. In the words of a famous Iranian poet of the thirteenth century:
All human beings are members of one frame
Since all, at first, from the same essence came.
When time afflicts a limb with pain
The other limbs cannot at rest remain.
Source

