In a recent interview, Iran’s Foreign Minister, Seyed Abbas Araghchi, recounted General Bagheri’s defense of President Pezeshkian during deliberations over Operation “Truthful Promise 3,” as well as the reasoning behind the ceasefire announcement.
Seyed Abbas Araghchi said:
“The logic of the JCPOA was that Iran would build trust regarding its nuclear program, and in return, nuclear-related sanctions would be lifted.”
He continued:
“When Trump’s America expressed interest in negotiating over our nuclear program, we said we were ready to talk—based on the same logic. We declared that if the goal of negotiation was to ensure Iran would not pursue nuclear weapons, we were ready. We were willing to build trust, but we would not shut anything down.”
Araghchi noted that during negotiations, the other side appeared open to various issues but insisted Iran must halt uranium enrichment.
“We completely resisted that demand,” he said.
On the consortium proposal
He added:
“A mediating country and others offered middle-ground solutions like a consortium, but none of them worked. When they realized Iran would not back down in negotiations, they turned to the military option.”
Negotiation was a national decision, not just the foreign ministry’s
Araghchi emphasized: “When a decision to negotiate is made, it is a decision by the whole system. It’s wrong to say the Foreign Ministry or our foreign policy was deceived. The Foreign Ministry acted on instructions from the leadership. It was the system that decided to enter negotiations, and the Foreign Ministry was tasked with implementing it.”
We gained much from negotiating
He continued: “I believe that not only did we not lose by negotiating, but we also gained a lot. We proved our legitimacy to both the Iranian people and the international community. Can anyone claim that if we hadn’t negotiated, there wouldn’t have been a war? Not only could there have been a war—there might have been one even sooner.”
We do not back down on enrichment
“Had we agreed to halt uranium enrichment, a war might not have occurred during this period. However, since the West’s excessive demands never end, a war would have inevitably followed in the next phase.”
Araghchi emphasized that giving in to Western pressure is ineffective and that firm resistance is necessary.
“Enrichment was valuable to us, and it remains so. It is a red line that cannot be crossed,” he said.
The Iran–U.S. issue is manageable, not solvable
The Foreign Minister added:
“The conflict between the Islamic Republic of Iran and the United States may never be fully resolved, but it can be managed. It is an unsolvable issue, but we do not believe that every cost must be paid because of it.”
Referring to the 2015 nuclear deal, he said:
“The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) was an effort to contain tensions and reduce costs. If we had the chance, we would do it again today.”
He further added,
“If we can manage our issues in a way that maximizes national interest while minimizing costs, we will pursue it. But if doing so forces us to surrender or undermines the nation’s core goals and ideals, we will not proceed.”
Avash News