As Israel and Iran indulged in a major military escalation, Organiser Assistant Editor Ravi Mishra talked to Dr Iraj Elahi, Ambassador of Iran to India, on this issue. Excerpts:
Israel and Iran were engaged in a major military escalation for more than a week. This came to a halt after the US attacked Iran’s nuclear facilities. What is your view on this escalation?
On June 13, the Israeli regime launched an attack on Iran under the pretext of preventing an imminent nuclear threat. There are two points to consider in this context:
Firstly, Israel launched an attack against Iran even though it possesses nuclear weapons and has not signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). On the other side, Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, is a member of the NPT, and is subject to the most rigorous inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). In effect, a nuclear-armed state has attacked a non-nuclear state. Secondly under international law, specific conditions and criteria should be met to justify a preemptive strike. The attacking state must be able to demonstrate that, had it not launched the attack, it would have faced imminent aggression by the other party. Moreover, it must obtain the necessary permission for such a preemptive action from the UNSC. According to the principles of international law, in the absence of these conditions, such an attack is considered an act of aggression, and the targeted state has an inherent and legitimate right to self-defence. Accordingly, what we witnessed on June 13 was a blatant violation of Iran’s territorial integrity and sovereignty by the Israeli regime, to which Iran responded in accordance with the principle of self-defence.
“The US is the only country to have used atomic bombs against innocent civilians”
The Israeli regime not only violated the United Nations Charter by attacking Iran, but over the course of twelve days, blatantly violated other established principles and norms of international law by assassinating scientists, targeting civilian areas, and striking public infrastructure such as hospitals, children’s parks, kindergartens, nursing homes, libraries, and Government buildings (including the Ministry of Foreign Affairs), national broadcasting facilities, prisons, and nuclear installations. Following the regime’s failure to achieve its declared objective of destroying Iran’s nuclear programme, and its worsening situation due to the failing of regime’s air defence systems to intercept Iranian projectiles, the US intervened and launched an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities without taking into account the potential catastrophic consequences. In doing so, US flagrantly violated the principles of the UN Charter, NPT, the Geneva Conventions, and other international rules. If the above reasoning is properly understood, it becomes evident that during this 12-day conflict, one party was the aggressor while the other was engaged in legitimate self-defence. Therefore, once the aggression by the former ceased, the need for self-defence on the part of the latter naturally came to an end.
There were reports in the media that Iran was working on developing nuclear weapons. Is it true?
This question is surprising. Iran’s nuclear programme has been under the strictest supervision by inspectors from the IAEA for more than two decades. Even Grossi, IAEA DG — whose politicised conduct and cooperation with the Israeli regime and its allies have been revealed — declared, following the regime’s aggression, that there is no evidence proving Iran has sought to acquire nuclear weapons. Furthermore, US intelligence and security agencies have repeatedly confirmed that Iran is not pursuing nuclear weapons. In addition, Iran explicitly affirmed its peaceful intentions by signing the JCPOA in 2015, clearly committing not to pursue nuclear weapons. It was Trump, under the influence of Netanyahu, who unilaterally withdrew from the agreement and imposed even harsher sanctions on Iran, despite Iran’s full compliance. Worth noting not only is Iran not seeking nuclear weapons, but it is one of the fervent advocates for a Middle East free of such arms.
Israel fears that these weapons could fall into the hands of Iran’s regional proxies, such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and the Houthis, which Israel sees as a threat to its existence.
The Israeli regime and the US are in no position to be concerned about nuclear threat. The US is the only country to have used atomic bombs against innocent civilians, and the Israeli regime, with blatant disregard for the non-proliferation regime, has developed nuclear weapons and threatened other nations, including Iran, to nuclear attacks. The recent unacceptable and unlawful attack by the regime and the United States has inflicted irreparable damages on the nuclear non-proliferation regime and sent a clear message to other countries: adherence to the regime’s principles and cooperation with it shall lead to being attacked. Having said this, let me repeat it once again that Iran has not pursued nuclear weapons, let alone handing over it to others. What you refer to as Iran’s ‘proxies’ are in fact, deeply rooted national and popular movements defending their countries against the regime’s continuous aggression. You are witnessing what Israel is doing in Gaza, committing genocide without restraint. Israel has turned Palestine, Lebanon, and other countries in the region into subjects of existential threat, yet it portrays itself as the victim.
Iran suffered significantly more losses than Israel in this conflict. Israel decimated much of Iran’s air force and struck several military sites. What has this war cost Iran?
From the tactical point of view, ironically speaking, the barbaric regime was successful to assassinate some of our nuclear scientists; fulfilled its threats to assassinate several senior Iranian officials; spread fear among the people through attacks on public spaces and residential areas; and targeted Iran’s peaceful nuclear facilities, which were under IAEA supervision. However, in the other side, Iran delivered significant tactical blows to the regime’s military and intelligence infrastructure. More important, however, is the strategic dimension of this aggression. In its aggression, the Israeli regime pursued several main strategic objectives: forcing Iran into surrender; bringing about regime change; and disappearing Iran’s nuclear programme. A brief review of the course of events shows that the regime failed to achieve any of these strategic objectives.
On the other hand, Iran’s principal strategic objective during the 12-day aggression was to demonstrate the righteousness of its position in the face of the modern barbarism of the Israeli regime and the United States. Iran sought to solely target the offensive capabilities of the enemy that enabled the continuation of its aggression. As the course of events demonstrates, Iran was successful in this approach, ultimately compelling the Israeli regime to cease its hostilities against Iran. Through its measured, calculated, and restrained response to the illegal attacks by the regime and the US, Iran left no doubt in the minds of global public opinion that it stands on the right side of history. Today, the Zionist regime is in the most isolated state of its short history, and due to its self-destructive, apartheid, and racist nature, it is inevitably doomed to collapse from within.
Is Iran now considering rejoining a civil nuclear deal with the United States?
Unlike the United States, Iran has always been willing to engage in negotiations and settle the disputes through diplomacy, and in fact, it has never left the negotiating table. In 2015, Iran signed the JCPOA with the US, three European countries, China, and Russia in an effort to settle disagreements. However, it was Trump who unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA. Despite the US breach of JCPOA, Iran still agreed to enter into negotiations even with Trump. You are surely aware that we were engaged in negotiations with the US toward a lasting nuclear agreement when we came under aggression by the regime. Experience has shown that the US is
not trustworthy.
Majority of Muslim countries, particularly Sunni-majority nations, did not express support for Iran. Wasn’t this a major diplomatic setback for Iran?
This allegation is entirely unfounded. Many countries — not only within the region but all around the world — have expressed their support for Iran. Neighbouring countries, through individual statements, condemned both the aggression by the Israeli regime and the US attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. These countries also denounced the said acts of aggression collectively, within the framework of various multilateral international organisations. The rightfulness of Iran’s civilisation in defending itself against modern barbarism is not a matter of religion or sect; it is basically a matter of humanity. For this reason, people around the world, without the slightest hesitation, have condemned the regime’s aggression and expressed their solidarity with Iran and Palestine through widespread demonstrations.
Do you think we will ever see peaceful relations between Iran and Israel?
This is exactly like asking whether civilisation and barbarism may be reconciled. I leave the answer to you.
(Note: Dr Iraj Elahi spoke to Organiser in a written Interview through email)
Comments