An Interview with Ghotbzadeh

The Kremlin "wants us cornered and helpless

For all his harsh criticism of the U.S., Iran's highly visible Foreign Minister, Sadegh Ghotbzadeh, has actually been a moderating influence within his country's government. As new Prime Minister Mohammed Ali Raja 'i was busy choosing his Cabinet last week, Ghotbzadeh sent an extraordinary letter to the Majlis (parliament), warning that a trial of the 52 U.S. hostages "would be against the national interest, "and urging a speedy, negotiated resolution of the crisis. Since the Majlis is dominated by fundamentalist Muslims of the Islamic Republic Party, many of whom want to prosecute some of the hostages as spies, Ghotbzadeh's letter was both daring and provocative. One factor that allowed him to take such a stand is that he is a lame duck: he has pledged to step down as Foreign Minister once a Cabinet approved by parliament is named. In an interview for TIME with a Tehran-based journalist, Ghotbzadeh last week spoke with unusual candor about his suspicions of Soviet intentions, his skepticism about the prospects for Raja'i's government, and other matters. Excerpts:

Q. Did you volunteer to write the letter to the Majlis for the freedom of the hostages?

A. Nobody dared to break the ice. The Majlis wanted President Abolhassan Banisadr to write the letter. Already stung by his rivals, the President refused to comply. The buck went round again. The country matters more than a personal desire for vengeance. Thus I decided to shoulder the thankless task of resolving the hostage problem for them. I expressed my unqualified opposition to the idea of trying the U.S. hostages. Such trials, from any angle you look at them, are against our interest. Our main demand--the extradition of the criminal Shah to Iran --has become irrelevant. But obviously we cannot let the hostages go without first having the U.S. give us back what it has taken from us. There are many wrongs that have to be righted.

Q. What are you referring to? The Iranian money blocked in U.S. banks?

A. The $8.5 billion seized by the U.S. is ours. Its return to Iran needs no negotiation. Some U.S. companies have obtained court orders for freezing Iranian assets against debts which they claim we owe them. Such claims should be considered. If we really owe them money, we will pay it. By the same token, scores of U.S. companies have received fabulous sums for equipment and services they have not delivered. Furthermore, U.S. companies have sold us industrial plants that they must, according to their contractual obligations, supply with raw materials and spare parts. We don't want anything more than we are rightfully entitled to.

Q. Do you mean you have dropped your claim to the Shah's wealth?

A. Not at all. The wealth the Shah plundered from Iran is ours without any shadow of doubt. According to the laws in force under the Pahlavi regime, the royal family as well as the Shah had no right to engage in business. And all transactions they made were laced with payoffs, coercion and illegal influence games.

Q. You have said the U.S. should also compensate Iran for damages inflicted by the Pahlavi regime.

A. These details must be negotiated. What matters, in the final analysis, is a clear, honest discussion of these problems. The best guarantee we can have for U.S. noninterference in Iranian affairs in the future is a thorough discussion, description and dissemination of the U.S. role in Iran. We want real independence. If common sense should prevail in Washington, [it would be recognized that] an independent, popular, grass-roots regime in Iran is the best option left for the U.S.

Q. How do you assess the problem of Iran's diplomatic isolation?

A. It stems, on the one hand, from the blind radicalism of our youths. They are revolutionary idealists out to put everything right overnight. On the other hand, the main culprit is the Tudeh (Communist) Party, which, at the bidding of Moscow, drives the young generation to political sabotage. The Tudeh has more than 50 years of experience in serving the Soviet Union as a trusted fifth column. And it is doing an excellent job today.

The Soviets are going to inordinate lengths to make sure Iran sinks deeper and deeper into international isolation. We have hostile governments on our common borders with Iraq and Afghanistan. The Kremlin, through its agents' propaganda, has also gone all out to create trouble between us and Pakistan, Turkey and the Persian Gulf nations. It wants us cornered and helpless so that, in desperation, we will turn north. Their policy is clear: to bludgeon Iran to its knees and then impose on it whatever conditions they want.

The Soviets engage in subversion, espionage and propaganda against Iranian government interests. But they never insult the Imam [Ayatullah Ruhollah Khomeini]. As I have often mentioned, the Soviets are no less satanic than the Americans. But they know how to avoid hurting the people's sensibilities.

Q. Will the clerical Islamic Republic Party, which controls the Majlis, moderate its policies when faced with the realities of power?

A. It must. Otherwise it won't be able to govern. The problem is that it has gone so far out on a limb in its quest for radical gestures that it will have difficulty regaining its poise. I am ready to help and I have proved it. Other politicians, I hope, will follow suit and give up the prevalent practice of scoring cheap points by blind, strident radicalism.

Q. What do you think of Mr. Raja'i, the new Prime Minister?

A. He is a good Muslim and devoted revolutionary. But he is incapable of running the country and ill informed about domestic and foreign affairs. His term as Minister of Education does not inspire confidence.

Q. How do you rate the chances of the new government's success?

A. If the hostage problem is solved, it will have some slight chance of success. Otherwise it won't get anywhere.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so viewer discretion is required.