Iran's Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki said in an interview with Time magazine that Iran is ready for talks with the US officials.

The Minister also indicated that recently revived talks on the nuclear issue with European Union foreign policy chief Javier Solana should continue "until we arrive at a multi-faceted formula" that recognizes Iran's nuclear rights and satisfies international concerns.

Speaking after the conclusion of a two-day conference on Iraq's future held in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el Sheikh, Mottaki explained that he did not meet Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice one-on-one during the conference, because "ministers of foreign affairs don't just meet accidentally."
Rice told reporters that "the opportunity simply didn't arise...I would have taken that opportunity."
Besides facing each other across the conference table, Rice and Mottaki exchanged pleasantries at a lunch.

But Mottaki walked out of a dinner at which the Egyptian hosts had placed him within easy conversation range of Rice purportedly because he objected to a revealing red dress worn by a woman violinist providing background music for the occasion.

"Before such talks could occur, Washington would have to show political will to enter into discussions with Iran, and take unspecified steps to show its seriousness," he said.

The fact that Mottaki and Rice showed up at the same conference was, in itself, a small breakthrough.

But their failure to hold a tete-a-tete on the sidelines disappointed Iraqi and other officials at the conference, who believe that US-Iranian understanding may be crucial, the Time said.

TIME: Our two countries have a lot to talk about, but we are not talking very much.

Mottaki: We are ready to talk, but we have to have some substance and plans.

TIME: Why didn't you meet with Secretary Rice in Sharm el Sheikh? Mottaki: There was no advance planning for a meeting. That's why it didn't take place. Ministers of foreign affairs don't just meet accidentally. You need to have certain preparations in advance. First of all, there should be a political will for the meeting. They should have an agenda of what they are going to talk about. We don't want to have this conversation for the sake of a conversation. We are not looking for a theatrical show.

TIME: Does Iran have the political will to have a dialogue with the United States? Or is it the United States that does not have the political will?
Mottaki: The Islamic Republic of Iran has always, has consistently had the political will to deal and examine the issues between the two sides. But we have to receive a signal from the other side as well.

Also, we have to see some steps to assure the seriousness of the other side.

TIME: You are telling me that you have the political will to start talks with the United States?
Mottaki: There is the political will on our side to review and to discuss the problems that have been created by the United States over the many years in Iran. And also the problems that have been created by the United States in the region over the past years. If there is a willingness on the other side, we are prepared to do that.

TIME: What did you [Mottaki and Rice] speak to each other about at the lunch?
Mottaki: There was nothing special, just pleasantries. This is not really very important.

TIME: Why doesn't Iran take up Rice's offer, which she repeated that if Iran suspends its uranium enrichment activities, that the United States is ready to discuss all the topics Iran and America would like to talk about?
Mottaki: The government really doesn't have any right to stop something that is totally legal.

TIME: You did before; you made a suspension before [in 2003, during talks with the European Union].

Mottaki: At that time, we tried to build confidence and we did that. [For] more than two years, we suspended our activities. But we did not see serious will on the other side to recognize our rights.

That's why we started to move ourselves in order to secure our rights.

Under the supervision of the IAEA, with the cameras installed, and continuous inspections by the inspectors. And we have entered a new phase of industrial-scale production of nuclear fuel. This has been a right. According to the charter of the United Nations, the Security Council has no right to impose on nations things that are against their inalienable rights. So this precondition of Ms. Rice is wrong from the very beginning. Americans and the British should also realize that they do not have a better position over the others. They should also listen to the others as well.

TIME: How do you describe any progress made in the recent talks between Dr. Ali Larijani [head of Iran's Supreme National Security Council and its chief nuclear negotiator] and [European Union foreign policy chief] Javier Solana?
Mottaki: Good ideas were raised between Larijani and Solana. We found Solana to be a little bit more serious. We have received signals and indications from the 5+1 [the five permanent members of the U.N.

Security Council, plus Germany] that Mr. Solana has greater authority this time than before. The two sides agreed to continue negotiations.

We believe that 5+1 should encourage Solana to continue the negotiations until we arrive at a multi-faceted formula. On their side, they want their concerns to be alleviated. They want to receive the necessary assurances for non-diversion. On our side, we want our rights. Nothing else.

TIME: Have you given a new proposal for those assurances? Mottaki: The negotiations are continuing to arrive at such a formula.

TIME: What is Iran's position on national reconciliation to better draw the Sunni Muslim population into the governing process in Iraq? Mottaki: The constitution of Iraq has provisions on solving problems between ethnic communities, including the integration of the militias into the regular army of Iraq. The Iraqi government is doing that, and we support that.

TIME: What is your response to American allegations that Iran is providing military support to Shi'ite militia groups that are killing American troops and Iraqi civilians?
Mottaki: These are really baseless allegations. We have given answers to these allegations. The real question is about the U.S.

policy in Iraq. I think it is much better that the United States stop pointing fingers at others.

TIME: Why do you call it an "occupation"? The Iraqi government invited the United States and the multinational forces to be in Iraq.

Mottaki: The initial entry of these coalition forces to Iraq was without the permission of the United Nations. Then later on they imposed what they wanted on the government. We don't want this to become something normal.