“Iran’s Nuclear Case Needs Diplomacy”, Says Brazil’s Ambassador

A well-recognized Brazilian diplomat, Brazil’s Ambassador in Iran is among the most honorable figures who has managed to earn numerous Medals of Honor through his thirty-year-old stint. With his multifaceted, analytical grasp on Iran’s nuclear case, Santiago Irazabal Mourao kindly accepted an interview with AVA Diplomatic, which took us to the worlds of Iran’s nuclear case, the Geneva Agreement, Tehran’s unpaid resolution, political and economic ties between the two countries, and, of course, the espionage issue in Brazil.

 An Exclusive Interview with Brazil’s Ambassador, Santiago Irazabal Mourao by AVA Diplomatic

Interview by Mohammadreza Nazari

Your Excellency, before you were selected as Brazilian ambassador to Tehran, you had obtained five medals of Honor, for what activities were you awarded those medals?

These medals show the significance of the measures I’ve taken through my career during thirty years.  For instance, in 2003 I was given the Medal for Peace by Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs for my peace-keeping activities in the UN.

 What considerable steps have you taken worthy of medals?

These medals were mainly given to me for my cooperation with the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as token of a remembrance.

 You have had some activities in disarmament and non-proliferation; what are your main fields of activity?

Since 2004, I’ve been the chairperson of disarmament department and involved in disarmament, non-proliferation and nuclear issues in our country and worldwide. Some parts of it were about Iran’s nuclear program.

 Indonesian Ambassador to Tehran was also his country’s representative in Disarmament Committee of the U.N. Is the reason why you were selected also related to your membership of this committee as you were supposedly well informed about Iran’s issues beforehand?

It’s an interesting question. Actually, the fact that Indonesian Ambassador used to be a member of this committee like me is just related to the selection approach of governments.

 Based on your experience and knowledge about nuclear issues, what is your assessment of the Geneva Talks?

It is evident that the second Geneva Agreement is an important step for both Iran and the negotiating sides. Brazil has always supported the peaceful solution and negotiation in tackling Iran’s nuclear issue.

 Do you find the Geneva Agreement promising? Do you think there is a bright future ahead of enrichment in Iran?

Yes. I believe that this agreement is technically measured and makes me so optimistic. It’s a six-month opportunity for both sides to make preparations for clarification and also to establish trust which are indispensable to further agreements.

 Brazil once tried to be the host of the nuclear talks along with Turkey; is Brazil interested in being involved once again?

Tehran’s pronouncement in 2010 between Iran, Turkey and Brazil happened when Iran’s case had not made much progress. Brazil made a wholehearted effort to make countries believe that Iran’s nuclear issue should be worked out peacefully. And about Brazil being the host; Brazil is not the only decision maker, and all countries are involved.

 Why was Tehran Agreement not implemented and stayed just as a pronouncement?

It could have reached a desirable conclusion, but France and the U.S. halted it by installing new sanctions. Back then, Iran had 5% enrichment. But later on, Iran started 20% enrichment as it needed fuel for Tehran’s reactor.

 You have been Brazil’s representative in many nuclear technology control conferences which means you are well acquainted with the atmosphere of nuclear talks. Do you think Iran can hope that as a result of lowering the enrichment level, its fuel will be provided by other countries?

I’m optimistic about Iran’s nuclear case being solved peacefully because of two reasons. First is the fact that both sides started the negotiations with determination, and second is that there has been many positive acts in Iran’s relationship with the IAEA recently.

 Iran declared that they increased the enrichment level to 20%, because their needed fuel was not provided. But now, Iran has reduced it again to 5%. Is it possible that they don’t provide the needed fuel pushing Iran to return to 20%?

This is a temporary agreement for 6 months and there is no certainty what will happen afterwards. For the time being, it is agreed that Iran should sustain 20% enrichment for 6 months.

 Do you think there is any guarantee that after these 6 months, highly enriched fuel will be provided for Iran?

We know that the second Geneva Agreement is there to establish trust. There are decisions in this agreement for 6 months and Iran is supposed to win their trust; one is decreasing the level of enrichment. In other words, all 20% reserves should be transformed to 5% and new centrifuges should not be installed. In return, P5+1 guarantee that they will partly lift sanctions. Both sides are supposed to do the agreed tasks in 6 months. It is not really predictable what they will take into consideration after 6 months, on what percent of enrichment they will agree or what parameters will be important to them.

Once more, I emphasize that everything is uncertain now and the agreement will be implemented after 6 months. Should the IAEA play a more active role in this case, some parameters of the long term agreement may change.

 One of the subjects in the second Geneva Agreement is lifting sanctions step by step. At the moment, there are some agreements reached in automobile, petroleum and petrochemical industry. What will be the tangible effect of this agreement on Iran-Brazil economic relations?

Trade Volume between the two countries reached $2.1 billion in 2012. This figure may fall to 1.5 billion this year which is a 40% drop and that is the effect of the sanctions. With sanctions being lifted, it may rise to $5 billion.

 Albeit before sanctions, this figure decreased to 2.1 in 2012 compared to 2.3 in 2011.

There has been always a kind of sanction during last 35 years. Between 2001 and 2013 it was really difficult to transfer money between the two countries. On one hand, Brazilian businessmen are worried about money transactions which reduce their trade. On the other hand, Iran prefers to cooperate with countries which somehow need petroleum. For instance, China and India have great economic ties with Iran as they buy huge amounts of petroleum from Iran. If you put these two factors together, you realize why sanctions have reduced our economic relations.

 Apparently, after the final agreement, the West will also make profit by lifting sanctions. For example, companies like Peugeot and Renault will resume their export to Iran.

Whether or not will western countries like France or even Brazil make profit after this resolution is not on the agenda. What matters is that sanctions on Iran’s automobile industry will be lifted so other countries can compete in this industry. For example, Peugeot and Renault will have rivalry, and it will somehow lead to job creation for Iranians.

 Do you think Brazilian automobile manufacturers are developed enough to compete with Renault and Peugeot?

I don’t know what Peugeot’s or Renault’s attitudes towards the market are, but I’m sure that Brazilian automobile industry is developed and ready to compete. Even right now, we export spare parts for cars to Iran.

 Should we expect Brazilian automobile manufacturers to be invited to Iran by you?

Sure, Brazilian automobile manufacturers understand that Iran is a tempting market with a population of approximately 74 million. We are just waiting for sanctions to be eased or totally lifted.

One of the issues in talks is that Iran does not trust the U.S. Many people in Iran believe that the U.S. can’t be trusted. I’ve heard that such a view is becoming more popular in Brazil too. TV Globo reported that the U.S. has been spying on a Brazilian petroleum company. On September 1, this TV also reported that the U.S. National Security Agency has spied on Rousseff and Enrique Pena Nieto’s calls and text messages. How does Brazil deal with the U.S. interferences?

Some of what you said is not true. For example, having access to Ms. Rousseff’s does not make Brazilians lose their trust in the U.S. As you know the U.S. is one of our main business associates; so, it’s not about losing trust in the U.S. Of course, it is right that National Security Agency has had access to her mails and Petrobras was wiretapped. That’s why Brazil asked for official explanation from the U.S. and also informed the U.N. about the case.

 In an interview with a local newspaper, Mr. Cardozo, Brazil’s Minister of Justice, asserted that what the U.S. has done is violating national sovereignty. Do you think so?

I don’t treat this subject as you do, you need to consider the passage of time.

To what extent do you think the U.S. power has been effective in its one-way relationship with Brazil?

Brazil is a powerful country, too. My reaction has been affected by the passage of time and the fact that the U.S. government declared that although they admit that this has happened, they do not approve of this behavior.

 If NSA read your mails as Brazilian ambassador to Tehran, how will you feel? Won’t you feel unsafe?

I feel unsafe if all have access to my mails and phone calls. Certainly, this is important to me. That’s why I took a proposal to the U.N. General Assembly; because privacy is of paramount importance.

 Is the espionage on Brazilian Petroleum Company because of changes happening in your petroleum industry? Do you want to eliminate the Mafia from your petroleum and gas industry just as Mexico did?

I don’t see any relationship between reforms in petroleum industry and Petrobras issue of wiretapping. And you need to know that Mexican Petroleum Industry Company has been experiencing reforms for ten years. This is because of Mexican mafia. Petrobras is a Petroleum tycoon in Brazil and there is absolutely no relationship between it and reforms in Mexico. Anyway, different countries are active in petroleum industry and getting information on this worldwide trade is vital to many countries; I think that is the reason behind the wiretapping issue.

 Russian ambassador to Tehran invites their petroleum and petrochemical companies to Iran, why don’t you revive Iran-Brazil relationship?

Petrobras is a private company, and it is possible that they come to Iran again after sanctions are ended or eased.

 Have you had the opportunity to visit other cities in Iran as Brazilian ambassador?

A few times. I have just traveled to Yazd which is a very beautiful city.

 How different was your perception of Iran before and after traveling to Iran?

Iran is not shown to other countries as it really is. It is facing difficulty introducing itself to the international community. Before, I only had figures and statistics in mind, but when I saw Iran, especially Tehran, I was impressed. There are great potentials and opportunities in Iran. I entered Iran a few weeks before the Presidential election and observed democracy and people’s happiness before and after the election. After a short while, when Iran managed to make its way to the World Cup, I saw people on the streets once again expressing their cheerfulness. I have seen similarities between Iran and Brazil and think that the ties thereof will be increase in the future.

 Regarding football, somewhere you have promised that you will invite Brazil’s football team to Iran. Have you planned on anything yet?

I’m just working on it. With regard to Brazil’s football league, I try to invite Brazilian teams to Iran.