The crisis of confidence between Iran and the West

Francois Nicoullaud, former french ambassador in Tehran(2001-2005) : I believe that sanctions in general do not help in finding a solution to the crisis of confidence between Iran and the West. Applying sanctions and calling for dialogue looks like pressing simultaneously the brake and the accelerator of a car. It will be hard to make it move!

Q.What do you think of the position of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he says that Iran is ready to resume dialogue on the nuclear file next September, under certain conditions?

A. It is certainly important to start rapidly exploring a ground of understanding in this nuclear file. On the technical side of things, solutions are rather simple and well known from the experts. But everything has become entangled with this perequisite of confidence. If we all had confidence the ones into the others, all problems would be solved! With such a perequisite, there will always be a good reason not to sit at the negotiating table…

Q. So, how can we move forward?

A. Ideally, both sides should accept, at least for a short time, to issue less political statements and less condemnations. And during this lapse of time, technicians and lawyers familiar with nuclear matters should be asked to put together a simple and clear agreement, easy to apply and to verify. If such an agreement is faithfully implemented by both sides, confidence will develop quite naturally! Confidence arises from agreements well implemented, it does not have to precede them.

Q. How do you see the role of Turkey and Brazil?

A. Turkey and Brazil have played a very useful role by demonstrating that there was a possibility to reach an agreement with Iran on a concrete project of cooperation in the nuclear field. The Tehran agreement is a good base on which to build.

Q. What do you mean?

A. The idea that Iran should export the uranium it enriches inNatanz in order to purchase abroad what it needs, for instance nuclear fuel for its research reactor, is an excellent idea. To grow a stockpile of low enriched uranium without making use of it of it looks like putting banknotes into a safe, without making use of them, with no profit whatsoever!

Q. What do you think of Iran’s determination to develop its peaceful nuclear program?

A. This determination is perfectly legitimate. But on the practical side, no country can develop an ambitious peaceful nuclear program without help from outside. Or else, it should accept to loose an enormous amount of time and money for rediscovering what has been already discovered by others. Therefore, if Iran wants to progress rapidly in the nuclear field, it needs the cooperation of the outer world. And the outer world needs Iran to establish enduring peace and stability in the Middle East. This gives us the base for a good agreement, beneficial to both sides.

Q. What do you think of a possible attack on Iranian nuclear sites from Israel or the United States?

A. Is such a threat credible or not? I do not know. What I find worrysome is the fact that such an idea comes up so regularly and makes so often the headlines of the press, being now something to which public opinion around the world has become accustomed. From the point of view of international law, it would be extremely shocking to see a country alien to the Non Proliferation Treaty, or another country allowed by the same Treaty to keep a nuclear arsenal, attack the nuclear sites of a member of this Treaty, placed under control of peaceful use by the International Agency for Atomic Energy. As for the strategic consequences of such an eventuality, they are as far-reaching as impredictable. Luckily, even in Israel and in the United States, voices do rise to combat such an eventuality. I dearly hope that common sense will finally prevail!