. . .

THE MINISTER - Relations between the Iranian and French peoples are very long-standing. History has made them friends. There have been proven contacts since the Middle Ages, but it was with the Safavids that relations between our two nations really began, with King Louis XIII.

The ties between our two countries were particularly close before the First World War. For example, Persia had 13 consuls or vice-consuls resident in France and your country played a very active part in the great universal exhibitions of 1878 and 1900 in Paris.

Our relations have always had a profound cultural dimension, undoubtedly a consequence of the fact that our nations are both very old and their cultures have radiated influence well beyond their borders. This dimension is still very much alive, since the next few months will be marked in France by some remarkable events testifying to the affinities between our two cultures, in particular the "Le siècle d'Ispahan" exhibition on Safavid Iran, scheduled to be held at the Louvre.

What finer evidence of these affinities than the mutual borrowings between our two languages? In French we use - without realizing it - a word of Persian origin when we talk about "paradis" [paradise]; and the Iranians speak in French when they use the French word "merci" for "thank you".

This closeness between us doesn't belong just to the past. For France, this is one more reason to develop a confident, solid, lasting relationship with Iran. We are keen for Iran to be a prosperous, respected State, fully integrated into the community of nations.

This relationship must be ambitious and embrace every sphere: culture, where there are already many affinities, as I've already said, but also the political and economic spheres.

In the development of the relationship between our two peoples, it isn't either our readiness or will to do so which are at issue.

At issue are the international community's concerns which are preventing us from putting as much effort as we would like, and in an atmosphere of total confidence, into building a closer relationship:

- politically, the principal obstacle is the resolution of the nuclear issue: the Iranian government has to comply with the international community's demands;

- economically too, our relations will inevitably depend on what happens on the nuclear issue. Foreign investors and the international financial community are increasingly hesitant and tending to turn away from Iran. This is obviously very damaging for the Iranian economy, whose development potential is immense, but depends greatly on its foreign exchanges.

As you know, French companies are already very active in some essential sectors of your economy, in terms of jobs, growth and access to modern technology. They could be far more so if all the requisite conditions were met.

Q. - Under the Non-Proliferation Treaty, all the signatory countries have the legitimate right to produce fuel for civilian purposes and Iran's objective is to produce fuel for civilian purposes under the international community's supervision and within the framework of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. So why is France, a country with very important influence in international relations, standing in the way?

THE MINISTER - I think it's important to tell you straightaway that the international community has never intended calling into question the rights of Iran, like those of all signatory States complying with the NPT. (…) The Iranians have signed the NPT, they have the right to civilian nuclear power.

The treaty recognizes the right to develop "nuclear energy for peaceful purposes". It's for the States to prove that it is genuinely for these purposes that they are using the nuclear power. This is why there's an international agency with the Nobel Peace Prize winner, Mr ElBaradei, who is the IAEA's director general.

This is where our problems with Iran lie:

- for 18 years the Iranian authorities developed, in secret, a fissile-material production programme in violation of their international commitments;

- secondly, the Iranian activities, particularly the uranium enrichment programme, do not correspond, today, to an identifiable civilian objective: Iran has no nuclear plants, apart from Bushehr - but, as you know, when the time comes Russia will supply the fuel for Bushehr;

- thirdly, since 2003, the Iranian authorities have ignored nine IAEA Board of Governors' resolutions and two United Nations Security Council resolutions. And the Agency has just confirmed that Iran isn't honouring her international obligations;

- finally, the Iranian authorities are developing a worrying ballistic missile programme, whose scale is constantly growing. (…)

But I also want to tell you that the measures the Security Council has adopted aren't designed to punish Iran, but solely to get the Iranian authorities to understand that they have to suspend their sensitive activities. And as soon as Iran suspends her sensitive nuclear activities, we'll be able to negotiate.

We want to get your government to understand that it has embarked on a dangerous path, from which Iran will gain no benefit. So this position harms your national interests.

The solution has to be found through negotiation. I think this is possible if the Iranian authorities make the gestures we're waiting for.

We ourselves have made gestures. President Chirac gave striking proof of this by proposing, at the United Nations General Assembly in September 2006, a "dual suspension": on one side, the Iranians suspend their sensitive nuclear activities and, on the other, the international community suspends the multilateral sanctions.

Your country's authorities' reluctance to resume the dialogue, despite the efforts deployed to this end, despite the ambitious offers of cooperation made to Iran, particularly on civilian nuclear power, increases our concern.

The proposal for a dual suspension is still valid and so the international community's decisions will depend on the Iranian authorities' decisions. So if the Iranians suspend their sensitive nuclear activities, we will suspend the sanctions and open negotiations.

These negotiations could then endeavour to find a solution which is just and fair for Iran and reassuring for the international community. (…)

But I sincerely regret that the Iranian authorities haven't chosen this path. Look at Mr ElBaradei's latest report, it confirms that the Iranian government hasn't put in place what UNSCR 1737 was asking it to:

Firstly, it hasn't suspended its enrichment-related activities or its heavy water projects but has, on the contrary, extended them.

It is still not cooperating satisfactorily with the Agency, as the refusal to allow 38 inspectors onto its territory shows.

It is not accepting continuous monitoring of the Natanz underground plant.

So in the face of this unfavourable IAEA report, the Six, which include us, are compelled to go on working for the adoption of a new resolution. It's regrettable. We'd like to act differently.

Nevertheless, and I stress this, the door back to negotiation remains open. It's for your government to decide on the path it wishes to take, that of growing isolation or that of cooperation (…).

Q. - The French government is asking Iran to act against terrorism. But at the same time we realize that a number of terrorist groups opposed to Iran are enjoying significant freedom of action in France, apart from their political action against the Iranian regime. So there are double standards.

THE MINISTER - If you are talking about the Iranian People's Mujahideen (MKO) organization, this organization is on the European list of terrorist organizations. In France it's still under the judicial investigation which commenced in 2000 and led in 2003 to the arrest of 165 of its members and of its top leaders, including Maryam Rajavi. The French authorities are acting strictly within the framework of the law and showing no leniency to the People's Mujahideen.

Q. - People always say that nothing is impossible in politics. And regrettably there are a number of facts leading one to believe that the possibility of the American threat against Iran is becoming increasingly clear. Can I ask you how France is going to behave should that arise?

THE MINISTER - I have learned one thing in politics: not to indulge in science fiction. France sits on the United Nations Security Council as a permanent member. You understand that every word in a resolution carries weight. The system is organized in such a way that we can draft resolutions unitedly with the Russians and Chinese. We're doing this incrementally, as you know. At the moment, it's about sanctions. We think it's necessary to have a second resolution if Iran goes on isolating herself. I believe in the diplomatic solution, but above all, I believe in something else, I believe in multilateralism and the UN. There are rules.

. . .