Saturday, July 5, 2008; 8:34 PM

A transcript of correspondent Thomas Erdbrink's interview with Mojtaba Samareh Hashemi, special adviser to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, on June 28 at the presidential building in Tehran.

TE: Iran has often stated that it is ready to have relations with any country except for Israel, but you require justice, friendship and spiritually as a basis for the relations. Can you please give me three steps that the U.S. should take in order to approve its relationship with Iran?

SH: In the name of God, I welcome you.

As you said, in the basics of the Iranian foreign policy, there are three principles, the principles of justice, friendship and kindness and respecting human dignity.

If you take into account these three criteria, every government who feels more obligated to act according to these three criteria will be closer to the Iranian foreign policy standards to have a closer relationship with the IRI [the Islamic Republic of Iran].

This is the message of the Iranian nation, and I think that these messages should be accepted by all nations of the world. I don't think any government can be against these messages.

We can study the actions of the American government on the basis of these criteria.

Does America feel obliged to be just and act according to justice? If you take a look at contemporary history and times you will see many actions which violate justice by the US.

TE: Can you give some examples?

SH: There are many instances

TE: Give me two.

SH: One of these violations is the invasion of the country of Iraq.

The Iraqi people did not invite the U.S. government to invade their country. The U.S. government said it is attacking Iraq to find Saddam Hussein's regime and also destroy WMD [weapons of mass destruction].

But now they didn't find any WMDs, Saddam Hussein's regime is gone but the U.S. has stayed on.

So what has been the effect of the U.S. presence in this five years in Iraq?

The negative effects are plentiful. The negative effect of the U.S. presence on the Iraqi people: hundreds of thousands killed, ethnic and tribal differences have increased. The Iraqi country has been left behind from the development train. Millions of Iraqis became refugees. Problems inside Iraq have created worries for the neighbors of Iraq.

The costs of the Iraq war has been paid out of the U.S. nation's pocket. Were there American people satisfied with this bill that is around a trillion dollars? The U.S. government now owes $900 billion, every American whether small or big, owes 30,000 U.S. dollars. A big number of the sons of the nation of America are involved in an unwanted war. As you see, the American nation was against this war.

So it is obvious that this is an unjust war, and against friendship, brotherhood and kindness.

This was number one. There are more instances.

If the United States government exits Iraq, and respects the rights of nations, if it acts in this directs, it will be become closer to Iranian policies.

This is one example.

Number two.

Making untrue accusation against the Iranian peaceful nuclear program. The IRI has a very clear cooperation with the IAEA [the International Atomic Energy Agency] and is following the rules of the IAEA and the IAEA has many times declared that it has not detected any diversion in the Iran nuclear program. The peaceful nuclear activities of Iran are easily open to inspection by the inspectors of the IAEA.

In spite of the NIE report that states that Iran has not diverted to nuclear weapons, in spite of all of these reasons they are still accusing Iran of diverting its program to building nuclear weapons.

Acting illegally and not respecting the rights of the Iranian nation, isn't this unjust? We have a very obvious logic. If being able to use nuclear energy and having a nuclear fuel cycle is good then it is good fro anyone. If it is bad, than it is bad for everyone.

This is an another sign of being unjust.

If the U.S. government recognizes our nation's rights, then it will become even closer to the IRI's policies.

TE: Those are the ground rules before you will talk to the U.S.? Is this a requirement?

SH: I mention two points as an example.

The main demand of the Iranian nation is that America must reform its behavior, in the U.N., the UNSC, its behavior towards nations, and towards the Iranian nation.

What's the reason behind the fact that everywhere that the U.S. government is present the people there are against its presence? If you ask the governments themselves in such a way that they are free to speak and without fear of American repercussions they would also say that they are not happy with the presence of U.S. forces in their lands.

Do you think that the Japanese nation is happy that American military forces are residing there? Or the Germans or the Turkish people that Incerclik air force base is in the hands of the Americans? Do you think the Iraqi nation would be satisfied if a contingent of American forces would be permanently stationed there?

The era of military presence for exerting political pressure to control the behavior of governments has ended. I think the time has come that the general stance of American administrations should change.

If in a certain period after WWII there was a pretext of the presence and spreading of U.S. military forces in the world because of the Soviet Union. Today the Soviet Union has crumbled and no longer exists so that pretexts is no longer valid.

The Americans shouldn't try to introduce a new threat in the world: The IRI is a country that supports friendship and peace. We have never been a threat nor will be a threat to neighboring countries. In the opposite we always have been and will be sorry if there is an invasion of any country anywhere in the world. We are a friend of all nations, a friend of all governments, and a flag bearer of peace.

The Americans shouldn't try to introduce Iran as an artificial threat and to use it as a pretext to spread the use of their forces in the region or anywhere else in the world. Or make it a pretext for putting long range ballistic missiles in Eastern Europe.

In the world today what is important is respecting the rights of nations and governments. With international cooperation, without any exertion of pressure one can create international peace. One of the tools for that are the United Nations General Assembly. If enough power is given to the General Assembly, many international conflicts and wars could be solved though the General Assembly.

The summery of my words is that the stance of the United States and its administrations must change. If they don't change it, they will be forced to change it by international pressure. Today, the world will not accept that one force will rule all other nations.

TE: Will Mr. Obama change America?

SH: We must wait and see.

TE: Do you prefer Obama over McCain?

SH: We must see their actions and then judge.

TE: A news report was published in the U.S. accusing the American Congress of secretly supporting a $400 million fund in order to provide assistance to rebel groups in Iran. Jundullah, Pejak, etc. Do you confirm that the U.S. supports groups here in Iran to create instability?

SH: There are signs of American interfering. For example the Shiraz bombing. It became obvious that the people who did this has been trained by American forces.

TE: Do you have proof?

SH: Also people entered Iranian soil in northwest Iran a couple of times. For example, the fighting near Urumieh city a month ago. Documents and evidence which we found shows that some of their equipment is even American. They had close cooperation with anti-Iranian groups like Pejak which is supported by the United States.

If that story is true, it shows that there are still some people in America who want to follow the present methods of Mr. Bush, which only create hatred in the world against the U.S.

TE: About the Shiraz bombing, can you prove that the U.S. was behind this?

SH: Intelligence follow-ups have shown that the bombers were in contact with foreign agents outside of Iran and they were also paid for the actions that they took.

Also in their interrogations they made some confessions, which will be published in the near future. The proofs and documents will be published.

TE: How about Jundullah, they have captured 16 police in southeastern Iran. ABC news has pointed out that Jundullah is supported by the U.S. government. Do you have proof of this?

SH: This is not something we have said, some elements in the U.S. government themselves have said that Jundullah was receiving U.S. support. Also the media coverage and propaganda coverage right after any actions by Jundullah shows that there is a special relation between the Jundullah people and the Americans.

TE: Do you mean the Al Arabia station, which shows their videos?

SH: No, I mean some American media.

TE: There was a military exercise, Israeli planes flew to Greece. Israel has attacked a facility in Syria saying that it was a nuclear site. Have you heard of the exercise and what is your response?

SH: I think this maneuver by the Zionist regime was a statement to show that we are still alive and exist. It was a maneuver for some governments in that region.

TE: How do you mean?

SH: They want to say that we have not yet declined to that level that you would stop your support. This was a sign to some European governments.

TE: I don't get it.

SH: The Zionist regime is a extortionist government, EU governments, under pressure of Zionists are forced to pay extortion money to the Zionist regime. When the Israeli government is waning, which we believe it is, so many EU governments prefer not to support the Israeli government when it is weak and waning. Because then they would not feel anymore pressure. When it does a maneuver, it says that "I still exist and you still have to pay up."

TE: You have no fear that they will attack the Iranian nuclear sites?

SH: Israel is too small to be able to hurt Iran. As has been said before: Any government that tries to invade Iran will regret its actions.

TE: One general said cut the Hormuz straits to influence the transport of oil, if an attack would take place. Is this a possible retaliation?

SH: The forces of any government that would attack Iran will no longer have any security in our region or anywhere else. They will no longer be safe, where ever they are.

But the main policy of the IRI is the policy of coexistence, brotherhood, friendship and peace, especially with neighbors and regional countries.

TE: If there will be an attack, you will retaliate?

SH: We'll give them a decisive answer.

TE: There has been talk of opening a U.S. interest section. Has there been an official request from the U.S.?

SH: We don't believe this claim of the United States.

TE: Why not?

SH: It is nothing more than a propaganda pose.

TE: Did you receive an official request from them?

SH: I'm not informed about an official request.

TE: There is an Iranian interest section in DC. Would you be completely against the idea of the U.S. opening a full interest section here or in the future this could be a possibility?

SH: If such a proposal is received it will be studied.

TE: If you would consider it, is it not time to speak directly with the US?

SH: I said it before, when the U.S. government reforms its behavior and its stance becomes closer to those of the IRI, we will be considering all of these ideas.

TE: First reform and then we will see about these steps?

SH: And then we will see what happens.

TE: The proposal. [EU foreign policy chief Javier] Solana was here, what is your reaction?

SH: The contents of the proposed package they themselves presented those during their press conference.

There are many common points between the Iranian proposal and the Solana package.

Therefore there is a chance for negotiations, an opportunity.

TE: But the main sticking point is the requested suspension of enrichment activities?

SH: Why should we always pay attention to differences? There are so many similarities and common points, we should start from there.

TE: There has been talk that if Iran wouldn't install any more cascades, it would help the negotiations. Is that true?

SH: Officially, we haven't heard anything. But they know that the Iranian nation will not retreat one step from it's rights

TE: You speak of similarities, in both proposals, can you give some examples?

SH: Regional cooperation, energy cooperation, security cooperation, cooperation in building atomic reactors, business, etc.

TE: These are the points you would like to talk about?

SH: Yes these are the similarities which could be debated from the negotiations.

TE: Are there any negotiations at the moment?

SH: No.

TE: So the plan is under study by Iran and the world powers are waiting?

SH: We are also waiting for their study of the package we have proposed. They should also not carry out actions which would increase mistrust.

TE: Iraq, do you still support the government of Nouri al-Maliki?

SH: The Nouri al-Maliki government has emerged from the will of the Iraqi nation and we were the first to acknowledge them.

TE: Is Mr. al-Sadr in Iran? [the influential Iraqi Shiite cleric]

SH: I haven't heard anything.

TE: Well, he is so important that you must know when he is in the country.

SH: Not necessarily.

TE: What is Mr. Ahmadinejad trying to achieve in his reforms of the Iranian economy?

SH: One of the bigger participation of the people in the economic management of the country.

More justice in the country, is one of the objective, for example about subsidies. The level which is more in need should be getting more help from the government. An other objective of this great economic plan is the protection and preservation of the countries economic recourses. In the energy sector we are one of the high user countries in the world. Rates of energy we must conserve this energy and not waste, looking at the rates. We must keep our energy resources for the next generations. So, one of the objectives of the plan is not wasting and better use of energy.

Also, reforming of economic structures like banking, taxation, keeping the value of the national currency.

This is a plan which can move the country towards more self sufficiency and strengthen the country economically.

TE: Iran has said that it's willing to help America to retreat from Iraq. Does this offer still stand?

SH: That is correct and we still offer this. We can help the Iraqi government to create the chance for the American forces to leave Iraq.

TE: How?

SH: If the Iraqi government requests it, we can help the Iraqi government create security so that the American forces can leave.

TE: Sending Iranian troops?

SH: If such an idea is welcomed and accepted then we can sit down and discuss on how to do it.

This does not necessary mean that we will send troops to Iraq. In recent fighting in Basra, Sadr city and Baghdad you saw how the Iranian government helped the Iraqi government create security.

TE: By bringing the groups together and making them talk?

SH: With political actions.

TE: Because Iran still quite some influence in those groups?

SH: All of the Iraqi nation, the Iraqi government, the parliament are friends of Iran. Their president is a friend of the president of Iran, they are two friends who can help each other a lot.