IRAN TRILATERAL: AHMADINEJAD SUGGESTS US-IRAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 KABUL 001395 SENSITIVE SIPDIS KABUL FOR COS USFOR-A, OES FOR AARON SALZBERG E.O. 12958: DECL: 06/02/2019 TAGS: PGOV PREL ECON SENV AF IR SUBJECT: IRAN TRILATERAL: AHMADINEJAD SUGGESTS US-IRAN RECONSTRUCTION COOPERATION; AFGHAN-IRAN WATER RIGHTS TENSIONS. REF: A. (A) KABUL 1336 ¶B. (B) STATE 53082 Classified By: Ambassador Karl W. Eikenberry for reasons 1.4 (a),(b) an d (d) -------------- Summary -------------- ¶1. (C) President Ahmadinejad reacted positively to the USG message to Iran on common interests in Afghanistan and the region (ref b),on the occasion of the Afghan's May 24-25 visit to Tehran. Ahmadinejad suggested cooperation could begin through joint infrastructure projects, or allowing Iranian firms to bid on USG-financed projects. Ayatollah Khamenei reportedly reacted negatively to the same message. When Khamenei criticized the United States, President Karzai responded in defense of the U.S. presence and role in Afghanistan and the region. In a bilateral meeting between the Afghan and Iranian Presidents and FMs, Spanta resisted a surprise proposal from FM Mottaki to sign an MOU on water rights and access to the Harirud River in Herat province (ref a). Spanta expects an Iranian-inspired misinformation campaign will begin in coming days. ¶2. (SBU) FM Spanta reviewed for the Ambassador on May 27, discussions at the May 24 Afghanistan-Pakistan-Iran trilateral summit, and the May 25 bilateral meetings between Afghan and Iranian senior leaders. Spanta also briefly explained his plans to form a political party, comprised of politically moderate Afghans. -------------- -------------- Trilateral: Extensive Afghan-Iranian dialogue on US intent towards Iran -------------- -------------- ¶3. (C) Spanta assessed the tone of the trilateral meeting as positive, but saw no tangible outcomes for Afghanistan from the event, although he noted an Iranian-Pakistan energy agreement was reached. Spanta, however, characterized Iranian attitudes toward their Afghan and Pakistan counterparts as patronizing - like a big brother-little brother attitude. The bulk of substantive talks took place in bilateral meetings both on the margins of the trilateral, and on the following day. ¶4. (C) Discussion at the Karzai-Ahmadinejad bilateral (attended only by Spanta and FM Mottaki) was dominated by the Iranian reaction to Karzai's conveyance of USG interest in finding cooperation on regional approaches. Spanta characterized Ahamdinejad's and Mottaki's rhetoric as consistent with that of the past, but he detected from both a readiness to talk. Ahmadinejad declared he would never deny dialogue with the United States, but then went into an extended monologue on the historical difficulties between Iran and the United States. ¶5. (C) Ahmadinejad then told Karzai that if the United States was serious about cooperation with Iran, it should agree to joint infrastructure projects with Iran, perhaps on Iran's railroad project in western Afghanistan or on joint roads projects. Alternatively, Ahmadinejad suggested the United States stop blocking Iranian companies' bids on US-funded infrastructure projects. Spanta told the Ambassador he welcomed the U.S. approach on Iran, and thought the infrastructure ideas were ones the United States should consider. ¶6. (C) In contrast, Spanta reported a hostile tone from Khamenei, during the Karzai-Khamenei bilateral (attended by Spanta, Ahmadinejad and Mottaki). Spanta saw no interest from Khamenei in dialogue with the United States. At one point, Khamenei criticized the role and presence of the United States in the area, claiming it was the cause of terrorism in the region. Spanta reported that Karzai spoke firmly in support of the United States role in Afghanistan. He told the Iranians that, "In 2001, Afghanistan was in darkness. The United States came and brought us out of the darkness." -------------- -------------- Water rights: Afghans reject surprise Iranian proposal -------------- -------------- ¶7. (C) Spanta informed the Ambassador of a surprise water rights agreement that FM Mottaki presented at the KABUL 00001395 002 OF 002 Karzai-Ahmadinejad bilateral. Iran has long sought water access rights to Herat Province's Harirud River, a seasonal river that flows into Turkmenistan and Iran. Afghanistan has resisted, contending that Iran has no transboundary water claim because the river is seasonal. ¶8. (C) At the bilateral, Mottaki presented a draft agreement to Spanta without warning. Spanta objected, pointing out that the two governments had conducted no prior consultations, and no negotiation of the proposed text. Mottaki reportedly made sarcastic remarks about learning diplomatic procedures from Spanta. Karzai then declared the government was in no position to sign an agreement, given the approaching end of the Administration. Ahmadinejad stated, "This was a small problem. Both sides should go back and find a solution." Spanta again asked for USG support in providing the Ministry a water rights technical advisor (ref a). ¶9. (C) Spanta expected he would soon be subject to an Iranian-inspired "smear campaign." He asked for U.S. understanding and support. The Ambassador pledged our full backing. Spanta recounted that two years ago, soon after he first publicly declared against Iran's claim to the Harirud River, a number of MPs and several media outlets unleashed strong criticism towards him on unrelated grounds. The Parliament eventually voted to impeach him. He claimed Iran prompted those actions then, and he expected it would do so again this time. -------------- -------------- Spanta's next project: a moderate political party -------------- -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Spanta informed the Ambassador that he expected not to remain in government after the election. If Karzai were to be reelected, he could not consider working under Fahim. Instead, he has been discussing plans to establish a new political party with a number of senior leaders, including Higher Education Minister Dadfar, Mines Minister Adel, Refugees Minister Barahawi, Independent Human Rights Commission Chair Samar and others. Spanta and his colleagues believe the international community has neglected Afghanistan's progressive democrats and paid too much heed to concerns of warlords and certain tribal leaders. He believed a party of political moderates could mobilize youth and counter what he saw as the misperceived strength of leaders of the past, like Sayyaf. EIKENBERRY