VZCZCXRO9400
PP RUEHDE
DE RUEHSN #0588/01 0882126
ZNY CCCCC ZZH
P 292126Z MAR 07
FM AMEMBASSY SAN SALVADOR
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 5663
INFO RUEHZA/WHA CENTRAL AMERICAN COLLECTIVE PRIORITY
RUEHCV/AMEMBASSY CARACAS PRIORITY 0323
RUEHME/AMEMBASSY MEXICO PRIORITY 6473
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ PRIORITY 0705
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO PRIORITY 0852
RUEHDE/AMCONSUL DUBAI PRIORITY 0004
RUEHUNV/USMISSION UNVIE VIENNA PRIORITY 0004
RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY
RUCNDT/USMISSION USUN NEW YORK PRIORITY 0082
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHINGTON DC PRIORITY

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 05 SAN SALVADOR 000588 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DUBAI FOR IRAN RPO, DEPARTMENT FOR ISN, IO, AND NEA 
 
E.O. 12958: DECL: 03/15/2017 
TAGS: PREL PGOV PINR ES IZ MX NU VE IR KNNP
SUBJECT: INTERVIEW WITH IRANIAN AMBASSADOR TO MEXICO AND 
NICARAGUA 
 
REF: A. STATE 19372 
     ¶B. STATE 23001 
 
Classified By: Ambassador Charles L. Glazer for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 
 
¶1.  (C)  SUMMARY AND COMMENT: On March 11, leading El 
Salvador daily La Prensa Grafica published an interview in 
its Sunday magazine with Mohammed Roohi Sefat, Iranian 
Ambassador to Mexico (also accredited to Nicaragua), about 
his opinions of the Salvadoran Armed Forces presence in Iraq. 
 The interview was held in Mexico City, and while focusing 
much attention on El Salvador, it may also give clues about 
Iran's intentions in the rest of the region.  The article is 
also interesting in the context that the GOES has recently 
shared its concerns about expanding Iranian influence in 
Central America via its relations with the new government in 
Managua.  GOES officials say they feel particularly 
vulnerable to the dangers of this expanding Iranian influence 
because of the presence of the Cuscatlan Battalion in Al Kut, 
near the Iran-Iraq border.  Moreover, the GOES has shared 
information with post concerning the travel of Salvadoran 
Shiites to Iran, via Caracas, to receive training. 
Ambassador Sefat was highly critical of El Salvador's foreign 
policy, and also claimed that Iran is not aligning itself 
with leftist governments in Latin America, but rather 
countries that seek to be "independent."  END SUMMARY AND 
COMMENT. 
 
¶2.  (U)  The following is an unofficial translation of the 
article done by post: 
 
"EL SALVADOR CAN'T HAVE ANY REAL INTEREST IN IRAQ" 
 
Q.This has been a beneficial year for Iran in Latin America: 
Visits to Nicaragua, Venezuela, Ecuador. A great year really? 
 
¶A.  It has been a very beneficial year, but more than 
anything the world keeps getting smaller. It is very normal 
that the authorities of countries travel to many parts of the 
world, for the diversification of international relations. 
We have not come to Latin America only to make our country 
known, but we have also invited the Latin America officials 
to come and visit us.  Right now in fact, there are two 
seminars about Latin America being given in Teheran, one 
about economics and another about cultural and political 
relations. 
 
¶Q.  Iran recently established a relationship with Daniel 
Ortega, who says he shares with you the year of your 
"independence." 
 
¶A.  That is correct, the Iranian revolution took place the 
same year of the victory of the Sandinistas, but before that, 
even before Ortega took the power, we have had bilateral 
relations with Nicaragua. I have traveled many times to 
Nicaragua, since I am the accredited Ambassador.  But when 
the Commander Daniel Ortega won, he invited our president to 
the swearing in ceremony. Mr. Calderon also invited our 
president, as well as the President of Ecuador. 
 
¶Q.  The only difference is that the Iranian President did not 
go to Calderon,s ceremony. 
 
¶A.  It's because the situation (after Calderon,s victory) 
was not very stable, that is why the visit did not take 
place, but in the other countries, it did. 
 
¶Q.  The Iranian President, during his visit to Nicaragua, 
declared that Nicaragua and Iran were joined by a "common 
enemy."  If that was referring to the United States, do Iran 
and the rest of the leftist governments in Latin America, who 
are against Washington, have possibilities of forming 
increasingly close relations? 
 
¶A.  Regarding the common enemy, you may ask Mr. Ahmadinejad 
and Mr. Ortega about it. I was present in that meeting (in 
Nicaragua) and the two presidents talked about economic 
issues, and above all, about the well-being of the two 
countries. We do not consider the United States to be our 
enemy, but we do have a lot of differences in several 
aspects. 
 
¶Q.  Compared with your president, you are very diplomatic. 
 
¶A.  Ha, ha, ha. We,re looking for the development and the 
expansion of the relations, not to destroy them. 
 
¶Q.  When President Ahmadinejad makes a tour in Latin America, 
he visits Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Cuba, and he sees 
President Evo Morales. There are a few doubts that the allies 
of Iran are the leftist governments. 
 
¶A.  Currently, the ideology is not really considered in the 
region. I think it is better to call them the  independentist 
countries, rather than leftists. You may consider all those 
countries to be leftist, but how would you define the 
government of Lula, or Argentina, Chile?  All of them 
apparently are leftist governments, but what they really seek 
is their independence.  We, as we have the same ideas of not 
accepting the force, have something in common with those 
countries. 
 
¶Q.  You say that they are countries that seek their 
independence. What country in Latin America, according to 
you, does not seek its independence. 
 
¶A.  Naturally, they all seek their independence, but this 
depends on what type of relationship they establish with the 
great powers.  Before, the governments of the region arrived 
at decisions dictated by the great powers, but now all arrive 
in power via popular elections.  For us this is very 
respectable.  In other aspects, from a commercial point of 
view, we consider Latin America to be a big market, and we 
want to have something to do with this market.  President 
Ahmadinejad had to pass a good deal of time to be able to 
achieve stability in his environment, and now that he has 
achieved it, he's decided to travel, now that there is so 
much noise being made about our country in other parts of the 
world.  The travel of our president is within this framework, 
that is to find relations with other countries. 
 
¶Q.  I want to describe some aspects of El Salvador:  It is 
the only country in Latin America that has troops in Iraq, 
with a government that has criticized some postures of 
President Ahmadinejad and that with near certainty will vote 
against the enrichment of uranium in Iran at the UN.  Could 
your government establish relations with El Salvador under 
these terms? 
 
¶A.  We would like that those governing El Salvador have a 
realistic perception about Iran.  You yourself note that El 
Salvador would vote against Iran in any resolution that has 
to do with uranium enrichment.  This shows that the content 
of the resolution is not important to El Salvador, that if it 
has anything to do with Iran, El Salvador votes against us, 
and we consider that an unrealistic perception.  If El 
Salvador wants to see things as they actually are, it should 
know that with respect to our nuclear program, everything is 
based upon our membership with the IAEA.  Everything we are 
doing is within the terms of Article 4 of the Protocol of the 
IAEA.  This article mentions that the countries who are 
members of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty can perform 
uranium enrichment activities.  Moreover, we allow 
international inspectors to come and we leave them free to do 
what they want.  I think that the authorities of El Salvador 
should reconsider their decision about Iran.  But our problem 
is a lot bigger than what El Salvador might think about these 
international topics.  I am making a considerate invitation 
for the authorities of El Salvador to travel to Iran, so that 
they can see the type of people we have, so that they might 
change their opinions. 
¶Q.  Do you think El Salvador acts like it does because it 
hates Iran, or because it follows the United States? 
 
¶A.  My answer is in your questions, it's very obvious. 
 
¶Q.  So are the leftist governments the natural allies of Iran 
in Latin America? 
 
¶A.  One could think that it's like that.  It's just that I 
don't view them in terms of "leftist."  My question is, what 
interest does El Salvador have sending troops to Iraq, 
against UN resolutions?  Let's suppose that later another 
government is formed in Iraq.  What will El Salvador gain?  A 
better way of putting it is that I think the Government of El 
Salvador must respond to its people and explain why this is 
in their interests.  Why do all those young Salvadorans go 
from a small country to look for war and death in Iraq? 
 
¶Q.  Recently the Palestinian Ambassador in Mexico told the 
magazine "Enfoques" that the fact El Salvador has troops in 
Iraq causes the country to have a negative perception in the 
rest of the Arab World.  And you all?  Do you see El Salvador 
in this way? 
 
¶A.  Naturally. 
 
¶Q.  Does it bother Iran that Salvadoran troops are in Iraq? 
 
¶A.  I'm going to answer you with a Persian saying, and I hope 
that you don't take it the wrong way.  On the branch of a 
very old and large tree, a little bird arrives to perch. 
When the bird is about to take off, it says to the tree, 
"Take care, I'm going to take off flying."  The tree answers, 
"I didn't even realize you were there."  I repeat, 
what role could El Salvador possibly have?  What role can El 
Salvador have if all their arms are provided by another 
country that calls when it needs something but turns its back 
when it doesn't.  This is a question the people of El 
Salvador must formulate: "Why are we fighting in Iraq?"  We 
were enemies of Saddam and we had a war with him, because we 
have 1,200 kilometers of common border and we didn't want 
Saddam to be in power there, but you all are very far away 
from Iraq, you can't have any interests there.  The 
Salvadorans in combat are fighting for someone else.  They 
are in a war that was not approved of by the UN, nor by the 
people of the world. 
 
¶Q.  You speak of how small El Salvador is, of how little it 
interests Iran, but Nicaragua is almost as small and even 
poorer.  Is Iran getting closer to Nicaragua just to have an 
ally in international votes?  Is Iran getting closer to 
Nicaragua to confirm that's what the United States does to El 
Salvador? 
 
¶A.  Yes that's true, but that's why we say that even El 
Salvador could be a friend of Iran.  Nicaragua is not the 
only Latin American country with which we have (diplomatic) 
relations:  Argentina, Uruguay, Cuba.  Currently there is 
much stronger coming together of viewpoints between Nicaragua 
and Iran, and for that reason we have a lot in common.  They 
invited us and we responded.  Here again I want to re-iterate 
my invitation for the Government of El Salvador to change its 
viewpoint.  We don't want the Government of El Salvador to 
see things as we dictate, rather that they simply see reality 
as it is. 
 
¶Q.  Doesn't it occur to you why El Salvador might be helping 
in a war started by the United States? 
 
¶A.  That's my question.  We know that the United States has 
interests there, and Great Britain as well:  they share an 
interest in controlling the oil of the world, just as they 
want to control Palestine.  But El Salvador?  People in  Iraq 
have never heard of El Salvador, they don't even know where 
it is. 
 
¶Q.  Does it seem odd to you then that someone is interviewing 
you about El Salvador? 
 
¶A.  Yes. 
 
¶Q.  I repeat: it's the only Latin American country with 
troops in Iraq, the last to move its Embassy in Israel from 
Jerusalem to Tel Aviv.  Can Iran be friends with El Salvador? 
 
¶A.  El Salvador on its own is going to one day come to the 
conclusion that its foreign policy is not good.  The majority 
of countries that sent troops to Iraq currently have 
embassies in Tehran.  I will tell you something else to clear 
things up:  with the United States we have some aspects in 
common and some at odds.  Our greatest enemy was Saddam, but 
despite the fact that Saddam attacked us, and he did so for 
eight years, even using chemical weapons, we weren't the ones 
who attacked Iraq.  Such an attack was not approved by the 
UN, which is why we never did it.  With respect to 
Afghanistan, we even helped the Americans quite a bit in 
their attack on the Taliban.  That was because the UN had 
approved the attack.  We are very happy that Saddam is no 
longer in power, and in this we have a common position with 
El Salvador and the United States.  Our hope is that a 
government is established of Iraqis and that it is stable. 
Our questions is:  if Saddam is already dead, and Iraq 
already has a government, what are foreign troops still doing 
there?  For how long will El Salvador be in Iraq?  What kind 
of government are they going to bring?  With which groups is 
El Salvador in contact with in Iraq?  What groups in Iraq are 
in favor of Salvadoran interests? 
 
¶Q.  El Salvador obtained this year more than USD 400 million 
in cooperation assistance (referring to MCC) that up until a 
year ago the U.S. was only giving to low income, not lower 
middle income countries like El Salvador.  There are many who 
mention the troops present in Iraq as one of the reasons. 
 
¶A.  Evidently you don't think that El Salvador is fighting 
over in Iraq for the cause of liberty, but rather for money. 
This has another meaning in this war. 
 
¶Q.  You were speaking about the profound respect Iran has for 
UN Resolutions.  Nevertheless, this week the UN asked Iran 
for the last time that it stop its enrichment of uranium, and 
the President of Iran answered that even in the face of force 
Iran would continue its program.  A contradiction? 
 
¶A.  Yes its a contradiction.  Nevertheless, the UN Resolution 
is different from the Non-Proliferation Criteria.  In Article 
4, the IAEA is giving us the right to continue with uranium 
enrichment.  According to this article, we not only have a 
right to have a nuclear program of uranium enrichment, but 
also countries that have such technology are supposed to help 
us.  The topic of atomic energy in Iran is political, not 
technical.  The United States in the era of the Shah were the 
ones that proposed to us starting an atomic energy program, 
and trained our personnel to do so.  The justification of the 
United States was that one day oil was going to run out. 
Thirty years later, the United States tells us that we have 
plenty of petroleum and gas and that we don't need nuclear 
energy.  If enriching uranium is so bad for us, why isn't it 
bad for everyone?  The IAEA has confirmed that we have not 
had nuclear tests.  Our neighbors are not signatories to the 
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, but they have nuclear arms, 
and the United States helps them, while at the same time they 
criticize us and ask us not to do so.  What we are trying to 
do is produce energy. 
 
Q  You say that El Salvador and the United States are in Iraq 
against the will of the UN, yet you maintain your nuclear 
program against the will of the UN.  Is this violating what 
the UN orders a game that everyone plays? 
 
¶A.  That's it, that's it, you're a real diplomat.  And what 
we want is not to involve ourselves very much in this game. 
We don't accept the resolution because we consider it a 
political game. 
 
¶Q.  Even so, are you willing to engage in violence to defend 
your program? 
 
¶A.  What we are willing to do is engage in dialogue.  We have 
proposed such dialogue on various occasions.  There isn't any 
problem that doesn't have a negotiable solution, but we will 
not accept a precondition, or any condition laid out in 
advance, in order to sit down and talk. 
 
¶3.  (C)  COMMENT:  The GOES has on various occasions 
expressed their concern about Iranian intentions in the 
region, and expressed what they feel is a vulnerability based 
on their deployment of the Cuscatlan Battalion.  El Salvador 
has made efforts for more engagement in the Arab World in the 
past year, moving its Israeli embassy from Jerusalem to Tel 
Aviv and opening diplomatic relations with a number of Arab 
countries. Mid-level MFA contacts told poloff they found it 
disconcerting that an Iranian Ambassador would speak at such 
length about El Salvador. 
Glazer