Iraqi politician denies Reuters report on Iran-backed militia disarmament

The timing of a potential US attack on Iran is under consideration by officials, British daily newspaper The Times reported on Monday, without specifying which officials are involved.

The report added that diplomats in the Middle East believe that US President Donald Trump seeks to constrain Iran with active threats but is also building political legitimacy for a potential attack.

“We have conveyed our position to the US and are now awaiting their response on entering talks,” Baghaei said.

While US President Donald Trump has recently pushed for direct diplomacy with Tehran, Baghaei said that indirect talks remain Iran’s preferred path for now—but left the door open to future adjustments.

“Decisions will be made in line with conditions and at the appropriate time.”

He confirmed that technical discussions had already taken place covering both nuclear cooperation and sanctions relief.

“There have been exchanges and consultations on various aspects of the matter, including some technical details,” Baghaei said.

Confirming speculation, he finally said Iran will be looking to Oman as a mediator. “Should a new process begin, Oman would be one of the main candidates for this important task,” he added, Oman one of the mediators which helped Iran resume diplomatic relations with Saudi Arabia in 2023.

Baghaei also said the country had given approval for a visit by International Atomic Energy Agency chief Rafael Grossi, who earlier said he hopes to travel to Tehran by late April, showing the country's readiness to cooperate with international nuclear oversight.

Iran has always said its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes. Amid threats from the US to push Tehran into a new nuclear deal or risk being bombed, he added that Iran’s military remains vigilant.

“Our armed forces maintain and upgrade their readiness moment by moment to face any potential scenario,” Baghaei said.

In response to Trump's latest threats, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei said that the Islamic Republic would deal a "strong blow" in retaliation for any attack.

Iran has also threatened to target American interests in the region, including the strategic US naval base, Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean, if attacked.

“The issue of nuclear weapons generally involves three components: production, stockpiling, and use or deployment,” the newspaper wrote—drawing a distinction that is rarely considered meaningful in academic or military discussions on nuclear strategy. The article went on to assert, “In the modern era, the possession of nuclear weapons—rather than their use—is inherently deterrent in nature.”

It appears that the government’s official newspaper is suggesting that producing and stockpiling atomic bombs is not a big issue as long as Iran says it has a fatwa prohibiting their use.

Iranian diplomats and officials often refer to a statement made by Khamenei in 2010 against weapons of mass destruction, calling their use “haram” or forbidden in Islam. They insist that this constitutes a fatwa, a religious ruling by a senior Shi’ite cleric that has the power of law.

However, Khamenei’s statement was submitted to a disarmament conference, and delivered in the tone of a political address, rather than as a formal religious ruling. It was neither published on Khamenei’s official website as a fatwa nor reiterated by him in subsequent speeches. Even if interpreted as a binding religious edict, a fatwa can be superseded by a new ruling, especially under the principle of expediency—a concept frequently invoked in Shi’ite jurisprudence to adapt religious rulings to changing political and strategic circumstances.

The newspaper argues that the Supreme Leader’s fatwa does not prohibit the production or stockpiling of nuclear weapons, which it claims serve purely as a deterrent, but only bans their use.
“If we consider the two reasons cited above for the prohibition of nuclear weapons,” the article states, “it becomes clear that they apply to their use—not their production or storage. The primary objective of developing such weapons is, fundamentally, deterrence.”

The two reasons referenced by Iran daily include a historical account from early Islam prohibiting the poisoning of water, and broad religious teachings said to be emphasizing the preservation of human life, civilians, and the environment.

This also suggests that the Islamic Republic’s stance on nuclear weapons is shaped more by interpretations of early Islamic teachings and the principles of Shi’ite clerical jurisprudence than by universal norms aimed at preventing mass destruction and civilian casualties.

US President Donald Trump has blamed Iran for escalating tensions in the Middle East, including the October 7 Hamas attack on Israel, suggesting that during his previous term, Iran had no money to fund groups like Hamas.

“There's a lot of things going on with the Middle East right now that have to be silenced…We had no problem with Iran. We had no problem with anybody. And then you had October 7th. And that was all because Iran, as you know, was not giving money to anybody because they had no money. Now they have a lot of money,” he told reporters on Sunday on Air Force One.

Trump’s comments come ahead of a planned meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday.

Iran's foreign minister said on Monday that while Tehran has proposed indirect negotiations with the United States through Oman, it is now up to Washington to respond, adding that Iran is in no hurry.

Speaking to Tasnim news agency, Abbas Araghchi denied claims of indirect talks already beginning, adding that direct negotiations are not acceptable.

Araghchi emphasized that any potential future negotiations would fall under the purview of the foreign ministry and be managed by the foreign minister, dismissing current media suggestions regarding the names of Iranian negotiators as incorrect.

He said that Iran has conveyed its readiness for indirect talks via Oman and is now awaiting the US response to this proposal.