Interview with United Nations President Dr. Srgjan Kerim: Dialogue With Iran Conducted by Michael Shank Arab News[WEBSITE VERSION] January 7, 2008
Dr. Srgjan Kerim is the President of the 62nd session of the United Nations General Assembly. On Dec. 13, 2007, President Kerim sat down with Michael Shank from George Mason University's Institute for Conflict Analysis and Resolution to discuss relations with Iran.
Michael Shank: How has multilateralism, a foreign policy concept you've noted to be of great importance to you as UN President, not yet been fully utilized when it comes to relations with Iran?
UN President Srgjan Kerim: Well, you have different positions. You have countries that have their economic interest there and they prefer that to be their guidance in dealing with Iran. On the other side, to isolate Iran is not a good policy. Many of these countries who have been isolated in the past did not change anything. On the contrary, everything was frozen, nothing changed.
I think with Iran we need more of a dialogue, a permanent dialogue, very articulated, very clear, and to involve Iran here at the United Nations in more activities. Also [we need dialogue] with the neighbors of Iran, because a destabilized Iran is the destabilization of all its neighbors. This is why we have to talk. But to be very clear that Iran is expected to be a constructive state in the UN, in the international community, and not to be a source of destabilization of other countries around it.
Shank:Do you think the US National Intelligence Estimate, which was released this week stating that Iran halted its nuclear weapons programs in 2003, provides a diplomatic window?
Kerim: It definitely does because I believe with or without this nuclear component, what's important is that we need a serious political and diplomatic dialogue with that country in order, as I said, to prevent it from being a source of destabilization of many countries around it, thus the whole region. This is why it has to be part of a serious dialogue. And the European Union has to play a very important role and the United States, China, and Russia have to be on board. This is where the Security Council should deliver.
Shank:What do you expect the UN Security Council to deliver in the coming weeks and months?
Kerim: To involve Iran. Not to repeat what happened during Saddam Hussein's time, with Iraq, to have a dialogue of the deaf which was, at the end, a catastrophe; to adopt resolutions for the sake of adopting resolutions, because that doesn't help as well. All the instruments, economic, political, others, have to be used to involve Iran in a very serious and responsible dialogue.
Shank:Looking at the role business is being asked to play in US-Iranian relations via divestment and economic boycotts, and given your extensive background in business, what are your thoughts on this? Are there perhaps more constructive roles business could play rather than this primarily negative role?
Kerim: I'm personally very much reserved when it comes to embargoes. I come from a region where embargo has been used in the past, as an instrument or pressure against the 'bad guys' so to speak, against those who created the instability, that waged war, the warlords of the Balkans and all the crimes committed there. Unfortunately I must say that the embargo measures affected more the innocent ones than those at whom [the measures] were aimed. So this is why I have doubts whether embargo by itself can resolve problems.
On the other hand, I agree with you on this approach, that business can do a lot to pave the way for sound political solutions. Business can have an important role in coping with some of the crisis, with miscommunications and misunderstandings.