Future scenarios depend on the Iranian authorities

Mentioning Sakineh case, you have sent a letter to Catherine Ashton, and have asked for a strong engagement of the UE concerning the violation of human rights in Iran. What do you mean by the term (un engagement plus fort) exactly?

We are particularly concerned about and committed to supporting this woman sentenced to a barbaric punishment. The President of the Republic said this to the French ambassadors during their annual conference at the end of August: France considers that it is responsible for the fate of Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani. The stoning sentence is a punishment of a bygone age that nothing can justify. It is a serious human rights violation that arouses indignation, an indignation expressed by tens of thousands of women and men who are mobilizing all over the world in support of Sakineh Ashtiani Mohammadi.

Our mobilization must be collective and concrete. I sent to Catherine Ashton and my European counterparts a letter conveying this message. Today, I am hoping that Sakineh Ashtiani Mohammadi will live and I repeatedly called on the Iranian authorities to take such a decision. On Monday September 6th, I met Sakineh’s first lawyer, M. Mohammadei. We will remain fully mobilized until, as we hope, a positive and final decision is taken.

Prior to be the Foreign Minister of France, you were - and are - considered a human rights activist.  As a human rights activist what would be your position towards the violation of human rights in Islamic republic of Iran?

I want to thank you for recalling my lifelong commitment to human rights. This is one of the major thrusts of my action in fulfilling my current responsibilities as French Minister of Foreign and European Affairs. Our priorities include support for the abolition of the death penalty, the cause of women, the fight against racism and all forms of discrimination and freedom of expression, to mention but a few.

In my capacity as foreign minister, I am constantly taking action to enhance respect for the universal principles of human rights in a globalized world. I would like to give you an example that is directly linked to the situation in Iran, namely the issue of freedom of expression and new technologies, which is today a fundamental one: we do see in Iran the fantastic new technology tools for broadcasting information and opinions, but we also do see how the regime censors these tools, restricts access to them, or worse still, uses them to track down dissident voices.
 
It is on the basis of this observation that I launched an initiative on this vital issue. Together with my Dutch counterpart, on 8 July 2010 we convened, for the first time, a meeting of NGOs, Internet companies and States that share our determination to combat repression and censorship on the Internet. In mid-October, we will convene a ministerial conference in Paris to go further still. The issue at stake is to better defend cyberdissidents and better control jamming and filtering technology.

Sakineh case is not the first and wouldn’t be the last. Do you view this situation as ‘Le Malheur des autres’? What should be done?

This is certainly not a question of “the misfortune of others”. I have spoken out on several occasions about the more serious individual situations by calling on Iran to put an end to them. I also encouraged and supported the statements made by the European Union which has spoken out publicly through Lady Ashton.

We will continue speaking out we have serius concerns on individual cases. The case of Sakineh is indeed an emblematic one, but, unfortunately, as you have pointed out, it is not an isolated one. A young man aged 18, Ebrahim Hamidi, has been condemned to death in Iran because he is a homosexual. France has expressed its indignation at this decision. We must commit ourselves to ensure that this teenager is spared and that homosexuality no longer carries the death penalty in Iran and the other countries concerned. Our commitment is not in vain: the film director Jafar Panahi was released from jail on 25 May 2010 following the appeal I made with Frédéric Mitterrand, the French Minister of Culture.

Green movement

By hearing the term ‘Green Movement’, what is the first image that comes to you? Do you have a clear image of the leadership of the green movement and its political stand point? From the western point of view, are their demands enough clear to be identified?

I have in mind the many Iranian people who were not in agreement with the results of the June 2009 elections, and who are now deprived of their civil rights. Without interfering in Iran’s internal affairs, one cannot keep silent when human rights are massively violated. In keeping with its traditions of solidarity, France supports all those who are fighting with courage, dignity and determination for their basic rights.

Different scenarios have been suggested regarding Iran. In view of all the circumstances, what scenario do you view to be most likely and what are its features?
All countries in the world are really attentive to what is happening in Iran, which remains the principal threat to international security in the key area of proliferation. Future scenarios now depend on the Iranian authorities’ posture. Our objective is clear: to make Iran understand that its choices come at an increasingly high cost and that the only alternative is to start serious negotiations. We will see if Iran is ready to do this. The Security Council, United States, European Union and others have taken measures. We are now going to implement these sanctions, and keep on with the dual-track strategy adopted and favoured by the international community.

Mr.  Sarkozy has warned that, “If Iran cannot come to a credible agreement; its isolation will increase, as will threats and possible dangers. We are preparing and organizing ourselves to defend countries that may face a danger.” What, or, who, are supposed to be organized and mobilized?

We are determined to do everything in our power to avoid being faced with the starkest of choices: the development of an Iranian nuclear bomb, which could spell the end of our non-proliferation regime, or the bombing of Iran, which would have catastrophic and far-reaching consequences.

The only way to avoid this situation is to reach a negotiated agreement; we are convinced that this can be achieved and all our efforts are focused on this goal. The only reason we step up sanctions against Iran is to demonstrate to it the high and growing cost of its decisions and to encourage it to cooperate.

If the Islamic republic reaches an agreement with the West on the nuclear issue; will relations with it become normal?

I would first like to reiterate that the sanctions imposed by the international community are in no way aimed at the Iranian people, but rather the decisions made by the regime. We have done everything possible – and I have personally seen to this – to prevent, in so far as possible, the Iranian population suffering as a result of the implementation of these sanctions.

Resolving the Iranian nuclear issue would naturally improve Iran’s standing within the international community. The country’s isolation is indeed in large part due to its decision to conduct extremely sensitive enrichment activities in breach of its international commitments, suggesting that all or part of its nuclear programme is for military use.

That said, the Franco-Iranian bilateral relationship must be viewed as a whole and is not limited to the nuclear issue, even though it is that issue which gives us great cause for concern. We are also gravely concerned by the human rights situation in Iran and will continue to remain vigilant in this regard.