As Iran seeks to resume negotiations regarding its nuclear program, a high-ranking official emphasizes that without a halt to US military actions, trust and diplomacy cannot flourish.
**US Must Assure No Further Strikes for Diplomatic Talks to Proceed, Says Iranian Official**
**US Must Assure No Further Strikes for Diplomatic Talks to Proceed, Says Iranian Official**
Tehran's Deputy Foreign Minister demands clear US commitment on military actions as crucial for dialogue, amidst escalating tensions following a series of strikes.
In a recent interview with the BBC, Iran's Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi asserted that the United States must explicitly rule out any further military actions against Iran for diplomatic negotiations to take place. He indicated that the Trump administration had communicated a desire to return to talks through intermediaries; however, the core issue of future strikes remains ambiguous.
The backdrop to these discussions includes a significant military operation by Israel that began on June 13, disrupting an anticipated sixth round of indirect negotiations in Muscat. The conflict intensified when the US targeted Iranian nuclear facilities directly, resulting in airstrikes on three key sites: Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan.
Takht-Ravanchi responded to claims regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions, reaffirming Tehran's position that its uranium enrichment is for peaceful purposes and rejecting accusations aimed at portraying Iran as a nation seeking nuclear weapons. He detailed that Iran's struggle for nuclear material access has forced the nation to become self-reliant, arguing that demands for zero enrichment are unrealistic and fostering a hostile environment.
Tensions escalated sharply as Israel carried out strikes, citing imminent threats from Iran potentially developing nuclear arms. In retaliation, Iran launched missile attacks towards Israel, which lasted for 12 days and saw US airstrikes further complicating the situation. The impact of these strikes on Iran’s nuclear capabilities is still under assessment; while the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, reported substantial damage, the extent remains unclear.
Iran's parliament showed signs of growing dissatisfaction with the IAEA, accusing it of bias towards the US and Israel by moving to suspend cooperation in light of perceived injustices. Takht-Ravanchi articulated uncertainty about when negotiations might resume and emphasized the need for a constructive agenda if talks are to proceed.
He dismissed the idea of re-evaluating Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, preferring to maintain their current trajectory which includes the capability to enrich uranium to 60% purity—a level significantly above what was permitted under the now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal abandoned by Trump.
Takht-Ravanchi expressed frustration with western criticism directed at Iran, calling it unjustified, and echoed a sentiment that any shared criticism should also be directed towards US actions. He noted ongoing communications indicating that the US does not aim for regime change in Iran, even as rhetoric from Israeli leaders suggests otherwise.
Commenting on the ceasefire and future relations, Takht-Ravanchi stated that Iran would adhere as long as it is not attacked militarily but acknowledged uncertainty regarding the ceasefire's longevity. Emphasizing the desire for dialogue, he called for cautious optimism and preparation to prevent surprise hostilities in the future.
The Iranian government continues to deal with complex domestic and international pressures, seeking a pathway that allows for diplomacy in a highly volatile environment.
The backdrop to these discussions includes a significant military operation by Israel that began on June 13, disrupting an anticipated sixth round of indirect negotiations in Muscat. The conflict intensified when the US targeted Iranian nuclear facilities directly, resulting in airstrikes on three key sites: Fordo, Natanz, and Isfahan.
Takht-Ravanchi responded to claims regarding Iran's nuclear ambitions, reaffirming Tehran's position that its uranium enrichment is for peaceful purposes and rejecting accusations aimed at portraying Iran as a nation seeking nuclear weapons. He detailed that Iran's struggle for nuclear material access has forced the nation to become self-reliant, arguing that demands for zero enrichment are unrealistic and fostering a hostile environment.
Tensions escalated sharply as Israel carried out strikes, citing imminent threats from Iran potentially developing nuclear arms. In retaliation, Iran launched missile attacks towards Israel, which lasted for 12 days and saw US airstrikes further complicating the situation. The impact of these strikes on Iran’s nuclear capabilities is still under assessment; while the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, reported substantial damage, the extent remains unclear.
Iran's parliament showed signs of growing dissatisfaction with the IAEA, accusing it of bias towards the US and Israel by moving to suspend cooperation in light of perceived injustices. Takht-Ravanchi articulated uncertainty about when negotiations might resume and emphasized the need for a constructive agenda if talks are to proceed.
He dismissed the idea of re-evaluating Iran's nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, preferring to maintain their current trajectory which includes the capability to enrich uranium to 60% purity—a level significantly above what was permitted under the now-defunct 2015 nuclear deal abandoned by Trump.
Takht-Ravanchi expressed frustration with western criticism directed at Iran, calling it unjustified, and echoed a sentiment that any shared criticism should also be directed towards US actions. He noted ongoing communications indicating that the US does not aim for regime change in Iran, even as rhetoric from Israeli leaders suggests otherwise.
Commenting on the ceasefire and future relations, Takht-Ravanchi stated that Iran would adhere as long as it is not attacked militarily but acknowledged uncertainty regarding the ceasefire's longevity. Emphasizing the desire for dialogue, he called for cautious optimism and preparation to prevent surprise hostilities in the future.
The Iranian government continues to deal with complex domestic and international pressures, seeking a pathway that allows for diplomacy in a highly volatile environment.
