Former Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif said on Monday that the United States failed to humiliate Iran in a June war and that only earnest negotiations could resolve the impasse between the two adversaries.
Speaking at a conference in Hiroshima in Japan on Monday, Zarif said Iran’s resilience in the face of military and economic pressure had shown that “the era of hit and run is over.”
“A superpower that spends over $800 billion a year on its military could not humiliate Iran, which allocates less than $10 billion to defense,” Zarif said.
“In fact, that superpower was compelled to evacuate all personnel from its military bases surrounding Iran before daring to launch reckless bombings against Iran’s safeguarded facilities.”
US talks with Tehran over its disputed nuclear program began earlier this year with a 60-day ultimatum. On the 61st day, June 13, Israel launched a surprise military campaign which was capped with US strikes on June 22 targeting key nuclear sites in Esfahan, Natanz and Fordow.
Iran denies seeking nuclear weapons and has called the attacks illegal.
Zarif said decades of sanctions, cyberattacks, and assassinations had failed to force Iran to capitulate, arguing that the country’s nuclear program was rooted in “dignity, not deterrence.”
He said Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s insistence on continuing the program stemmed from “resistance to submission."
“For him (Khamenei), it has always been about something far more profound and enduring: dignity,” Zarif said.
Iran's 86-year-old ruler appeared to double down on his hard line against a rapprochement with Washington on Monday, saying the United States must quit military bases in the region and sever ties with Israel to mend fences with Iran.
The former Iranian chief negotiator urged the United States to “set aside the illusion of demanding Iran’s unconditional surrender” and instead engage in “genuine negotiations” to ensure the program remains peaceful.
Zarif called for reviving diplomacy through initiatives he said he had proposed to promote peaceful nuclear cooperation and rebuild trust with the West.
“One practical step that I proposed in a recent Foreign Policy essay could be a US–Iran non-aggression pact,” Zarif said. “Another initiative that a colleague and I proposed in The Guardian a couple of months ago is the Middle East Network for Atomic Research and Advancement, or MENARA — a collaborative regional network dedicated to non-proliferation while harnessing peaceful nuclear cooperation.”
The United States has demanded Iran renounce domestic uranium enrichment while Tehran maintains its nuclear program is an international right.
Zarif said the network would include “an enrichment consortium bringing together existing capabilities into a collective peaceful and transparent effort,” adding that it would be open to all Middle Eastern countries willing to renounce nuclear weapons and accept strict safeguards.
“Only if the United States completely cuts its backing for the Zionist regime, removes its military bases from the region, and ceases interfering in its affairs, their request for cooperation with Iran -- not in the near future but much later -- could be examined,” Khamenei said in a meeting with students in Tehran.
Marking the anniversary of November 4 US embassy takeover, known as Student Day in Iran, Khamenei described it as “a day of pride and victory” and said it should remain alive in the nation’s collective memory.
He said the 1979 takeover of the US embassy in Tehran had “exposed the true identity of the American government,” calling the embassy “a headquarters of plotting against the Revolution.”
On November 4, 1979, a group of students stormed the US Embassy in Tehran, taking Americans hostage for 444 days. This act ignited the new Islamic government’s anti-US stance and set Iran on a path of prolonged conflict with Washington.
The Leader rejected the notion that the embassy seizure began Iran’s dispute with Washington. “The differences between the Islamic Republic and America are not tactical but essential,” he said. “Some distort history and imagine that the slogan ‘Death to America’ caused this conflict – this is naïve.”
The United States’ nature was “imperialist and intolerant of independence,” Khamenei added.
“Every American president has demanded Iran’s surrender, even if they did not say it aloud,” he said. “The current president said it openly -- he revealed the true face of America. What does the surrender of a nation like Iran even mean?”
Back in June, President Donald Trump demanded Iran’s unconditional surrender and warned US patience was wearing thin.
The United States held five rounds of negotiations with Tehran over its disputed nuclear program under a 60-day deadline set by President Donald Trump.
When no agreement was reached by the 61st day, on June 13, Israel launched a surprise military offensive, followed by US strikes on June 22 targeting key nuclear facilities in Isfahan, Natanz, and Fordow.
“I believe the enemy today neither has the power nor the conditions to begin a war,” Ali-Mohammad Naeini said in an interview with the podcast Story of the War on Sunday.
“They entered with maximal goals from the start. Now the question is, with what new motive or objective could they act again? When we speak of war, we mean the full-scale conflict that aimed to overthrow and divide the country.”
The problem for Iran’s adversaries, Naeini said, was not just weapons shortages but technological weakness. “Their real problem is the lack of advanced technology, inadequate air-defense systems, and limited technical knowledge,” he added.
“Even with what technology they possessed, they could not mount an effective defense, and there is still no sign of new strategic readiness that could improve deterrence or serve fresh objectives.”
Iran’s military readiness, he said, remains constant. “Preparations go on around the clock,” Naeini added. “From the youth of the Aerospace Force to ground units, the Basij, and senior commanders, everyone is in the field studying threats and developments.”
Response to Haniyeh assassination
Security officials, Naeini said, acted within hours of the killing of Ismail Haniyeh, Hamas’s political chief, in a July 2024 Israeli strike on his residence in Tehran. “The National Security Council met immediately,” he said. “The conclusion was clear: a response was necessary.”
He said an investigation confirmed the strike was not internal sabotage. “A shoulder-launched missile entered through the window and struck while he was on a phone call,” Naeini said. “The attackers used his phone signal to locate and hit him.”
The follow-up operation, codenamed True Promise 2, he added, served both as retaliation and deterrence.
“That strike was not only a response to the assassination but also a boost to the regional deterrence posture and to the morale of our allies.”
Operations and missile strikes
The Guards, according to Naeini, conducted 22 waves of operations during the 12-day war. “We designed the campaign so the Israelis would continually experience going to their shelters,” he said.
“From the fifth to the eighth day, the battlefield superiority was absolute for us, and on the final day we enjoyed complete victory.”
Iranian forces downed at least 80 advanced drones and recorded 334 wrecks, he said. “These drones employed some of the world’s most advanced technologies,” Naeini added.
“Through cyber measures and short-range systems we neutralized those threats and restored relative air security.”
On June 23, 2025, the IRGC launched missiles at Al Udeid Air Base in Qatar in retaliation for US strikes on Iran’s nuclear sites.
“Fourteen missiles were launched; six hit the target,” Naeini said, adding that “about $111 million was spent by the US to counter them.”
Iran’s aim was deterrence, not escalation, Naeini maintained. “When we can force the enemy to its knees with our operational units, there is no need to widen the war.”
The 12-day conflict ended June 24 under a US-brokered ceasefire, but concern deepened as 400 kilograms of Iran’s highly enriched uranium remained unaccounted for.
Iran’s missile and drone power across all branches of the Guards “remains fully ready,” though “not all capabilities have been engaged, nor was there any need,” Naeini said.
“Messages are still being passed through various intermediaries, but this does not in any way mean the start of a negotiation process between Iran and the United States,” Baghaei said.
“No official message was conveyed to Iran during Deputy Foreign Minister Majid Takht-Ravanchi’s trip to Oman.”
Takht-Ravanchi visited Muscat last week for a meeting of the Iran-Oman Political Strategic Committee, where he and Omani Foreign Minister Badr Albusaidi discussed regional developments and plans to expand bilateral cooperation, according to Iranian media.
Recent commentary about a restart of direct or indirect talks had been imprecise, Baghaei said, adding that Tehran has received no formal communication from Washington via Muscat and that shuttle efforts are limited to narrowing gaps.
Diplomacy, he added, remains active with neighbors and partners, including Oman, while any talks must respect Iran’s rights under international law.
IAEA must avoid ‘baseless repetition’
Baghaei called on the International Atomic Energy Agency to avoid repeating what he described as politically driven assertions about Iran’s nuclear program.
“The Director General has in fact reiterated that Iran’s nuclear activities have always been peaceful and there are no indications of a military dimension,” he said.
“The Agency should remain within its technical mandate and refrain from echoing unfounded claims made by certain parties only seeking pretexts.”
Iran suspended cooperation with IAEA inspectors after a 12-day war in June against Israel and the United States, codified via a new law passed by parliament.
Tehran’s cooperation with the Agency, he added, continues under its international commitments, but political manipulation of technical reports “undermines trust and objectivity.”
In September, Iran and the agency agreed in Cairo to restart inspections. However, after Germany, France and the United Kingdom triggered the reimposition of UN sanctions, it remained unclear whether Iran would comply.
A report by the Center for Strategic and International Studies said satellite imagery shows continued construction at a major underground nuclear facility near Natanz.
No conditions for talks with the US
Baghaei dismissed suggestions of an imminent resumption of negotiations with Washington, saying the environment was not yet suitable. “Whenever we reach the stage of negotiations, decisions will be made regarding the composition of the negotiating team and other details,” he said.
“But at present, the conditions for a meaningful dialogue are not in place.”
Iran, he said, would only enter talks that respected its rights under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
“Our rights and interests must be respected… If the other side develops a realistic understanding and shows respect for Iran’s legitimate rights, then we can say conditions for meaningful dialogue will exist. At this stage, we are not there yet.”
Earlier this year, Washington and Tehran held five rounds of talks over Iran’s disputed nuclear program under a 60-day deadline imposed by President Donald Trump.
When the deadline expired without a deal on June 13, Israel launched a surprise military campaign, prompting US airstrikes nine days later on June 22 that hit major nuclear sites in Isfahan, Natanz, and Fordow
‘US threats to Latin America condemned’
Baghaei also condemned what he described as US military threats toward Venezuela and other Latin American countries.
“We categorically reject the United States’ military movements in the Caribbean and Latin America,” he said. “Such actions are detrimental to international peace and security and have no legal justification.”
He cited international conventions that prohibit the use of counter-narcotics operations as grounds for violating sovereignty.
“Even under the 1988 convention on combating drug trafficking, there is a clear provision stating that such efforts cannot justify breaching national sovereignty,” Baghaei said. “The threats against Venezuela and others are legally and politically unacceptable and contradict the principles of the UN Charter.”
Baghaei said such behavior risked setting “a dangerous precedent” for international relations. “We are concerned that these actions could normalize interventions by other states elsewhere in the world.”
