What Causes Embarrassment for Our Country

Ahmadinejad’s criticism of the agreement between Iran’s former chief nuclear negotiator Hasan Rowhani and three European foreign ministers in Sa’dabad has become a controversial issue these days. HamMihan has interviewed Morteza Banak, Deputy Foreign Minister on CIS and Caucasian affairs in Hashemi Rafsanjani’s administration on the communiqué.

The Sa’dabad communiqué never referred to mandatory, permanent halt [of uranium enrichment]. Halt was considered as an optional act by Iran which could continue for a maximum of one year, with Iran having the right to resume uranium enrichment any time it wanted. Unfortunately, smear campaign against the former nuclear negotiating team has even damaged the face of Islamic Republic of Iran. The communiqué was not the decision of one person, and it was approved by Iran’s Supreme Leader.

Banak adds: "unfortunately, a serious problem with the ninth administration is their unfamiliarity with fundamental concepts of politics, economy and international law. After all their costly trials and errors, we hoped that they became more acquainted with these concepts. Unfortunately, Ahmadinejad’s recent remarks showed that after more than three years, he still can not distinguish between communiqué, agreement, protocol etc. and doesn’t know that each has different legal significations in international conventions. When the head of the government doesn’t understand the difference between a contract and a communiqué, naturally he won’t appreciate the nuances".

Former deputy foreign minister on CIS and Caucasian affairs stresses that Sa’dabad negotiations led to a communiqué, not a contract and it is expected that the head of government abstains posing issues that only have populist, propagandistic use and distort reality.

Banak believes that those against the communiqué have neither studied nor been informed about its content and merely use it as a propaganda tool in the election time. Addressing some developments during Ahmadinejad’s presidency such as seizing British sailors, or attending GCC summit and Durban II Conference, Banak said: "Ahmadinejad joins a GCC summit which releases a communiqué claiming that Iran’s triple islands in the Persian Gulf belong to UAE. The question is why are such foreign policies harming our national interests, dignity and pride and nobody is responsible?"

Banak also pointed to the seizure of British sailors: "they were arrested under the charge of espionage but released after Britain’s foreign ministry warning. After being hosted by the president, they received medals and suits and were released. But they took off the suits while flying from Tehran to London and had interviews against Iran in London’s airport. Is this a shame or a communiqué which was approved by the Supreme Leader?"

Former deputy foreign minister also reminds of the Durban II Conference: "no senior official will attend a meeting in which they may insult him or throw tomatoes at him, or officials of 40 countries leave the session when he is giving a speech. Was it necessary to attend the meeting at a high level and create a situation which embarrasses every Iranian? Is this a shame or a communiqué which was approved by the Supreme Leader?"

Banak stressed that Iran’s dignity and authority has been undermined by such measures but they are trying to spin all the failures. He added that Iranians are clever people who understand where the problems lie.