Iran opposes nuclear chief Grossi for top UN job, faulting war silence

“When we realized in 2015 that such a solution had been found between the US and Iranian negotiators, we asked our Iranian friends: are you sure this is correct? We were told that Iran does not intend to violate anything, and we believed that as well,” Sergei Lavrov said in an interview with Iran’s state-run TV aired on Monday.

The veteran diplomat directly tied the controversial clause to former Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif’s final talks with then US Secretary of State John Kerry, saying other parties were sidelined as Washington and Tehran closed the deal.

Lavrov’s earlier comments on the issue triggered an unusually public war of words with Zarif, who said the snapback idea was originally pushed by Russian and French negotiators and accused Lavrov of lying about the history of the mechanism.

Asked about criticism that Moscow did not support Iran enough, Lavrov balked.

“Seriously, it must be said that neither current politicians nor former ones have any grounds to complain that Russia failed to support the Islamic Republic at various stages of the negotiations,” he said.

Lavrov described current Western policy towards Iran as built on pressure and said other countries in the region were not fully satisfied with the approach.

“It is very important that, in our assessment, your Arab neighbors do not support efforts to increase pressure on the Islamic Republic,” he added.

‘Our Iranian friends’

Lavrov also signaled support for renewed nuclear diplomacy involving the US and European powers, presenting Russia as ready to help end the standoff.

“Our Iranian friends are aware of our assessments. The decision about whether to resume dialogue with the United States is up to them. We have heard that Iran is interested in resuming such talks, and as for the Agency, whether to restart dialogue with the Agency – we also know Iran wants to revive that, but the decision lies with the authorities in Tehran,” he said.

Asked if it is still beneficial for Iran to remain a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Lavrov advised Tehran to stay committed.

“You raised the final question of whether it is worth Iran remaining in the NPT or not. We believe it is worth staying and that one should not try to drag this issue into the public arena by criticizing everything that has happened,” Lavrov said.

Lavrov also raised concerns over Iran’s decision to curb cooperation with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) under an understanding brokered by Egypt, saying Tehran should take that commitment seriously.

“The actions and positions of the Agency have, to put it mildly, generated very unpleasant feelings in Iran, and this is completely understandable to me,” he said.

“But this is a question that should be put more directly to (IAEA chief Rafael) Grossi and his colleagues, so that the principle of neutrality is fully respected and they do not, at certain moments, take political steps that help one side or the other.”

Tehran and the IAEA inked a deal in Cairo in September aimed at resuming full IAEA access but little progress appears to have been made.

Iran suspended cooperation with IAEA inspectors after a 12-day war in June against Israel and the United States in which they attacked Iranian nuclear sites, codified via a new law passed by parliament.

US President Donald Trump said last week Iran's nuclear program is "gonzo" after air attacks he ordered in June and that it faced "obliteration" if restarted, telling Tehran they could avoid more destruction with a nuclear deal.

Mohammad Eslami, head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said Tehran had allowed inspections at nuclear sites that were not attacked but drew a distinction with facilities that sustained military strikes.

“There must be a protocol in place for inspections of nuclear sites that have been attacked before permission can be given,” he told reporters, according to ISNA.

“The agency, which neither condemned the attacks nor has any guideline for such situations, has no right to claim inspections,” Eslami said.

He added that pressure from three European countries, the United States and Israel “is not important to us and has no impact.”

Eslami said International Atomic Energy Agency Director General Rafael Grossi should be held accountable, adding that Iranian nuclear facilities had been under IAEA supervision before the June attacks.

“The director general must answer to the world,” he said, adding that attacks on safeguarded nuclear sites could happen to any country and that the agency should clarify what procedures it has in place in such circumstances.

The IAEA has said it is seeking access to key Iranian sites following recent military strikes, arguing that oversight is essential to verify nuclear material and equipment.

Iran has repeatedly said its nuclear program is peaceful and rejects accusations that it is seeking nuclear weapons.

Grossi told Russia’s RIA Novosti that inspectors had returned to some facilities but were restricted to sites that were not damaged in the attacks.

“We are only allowed to access sites that were not hit,” he said, calling the resumption important but insufficient.

“These other three sites – Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow – are even more significant, since they still contain substantial amounts of nuclear material and equipment, and we need to return there.”

He said determining whether there had been “any practical progress” in restoring full inspections remained the agency’s most pressing issue in Iran.

Israel launched strikes on Iranian nuclear and military targets on June 13, accusing Tehran of pursuing a covert nuclear weapons program – a charge Iran denies.

The attacks were followed by 12 days of hostilities, with the United States joining with a one-off strike on Iranian nuclear facilities on June 22. Iran responded with missile strikes on a US air base in Qatar, saying it did not seek further escalation.

Iran’s foreign ministry has said a recent IAEA resolution would complicate dialogue over Tehran’s nuclear program.

The agency has long sought access to Natanz, Isfahan and Fordow, where enrichment and other sensitive activities have taken place, and says oversight at those locations is critical to verifying Iran’s nuclear commitments.

The messaging emerged even as Iran's foreign ministry issued a formal condemnation of the shooting at a Hanukkah event in Sydney that killed 16 people and injured 40 others.

Tasnim News, which is affiliated with the Revolutionary Guards, ran the story under the headline “At Least 10 Zionists Slain in Hanukkah Festival in Australia,” in what appeared to be a celebration of the deaths.

The IRGC-affiliated Sabereen News also hailed the killing of British-born Rabbi Eli Schlanger, calling him "a staunch supporter of Gaza genocide who had met Zionist soldiers to voice his support for their war against Gaza."

Fellow IRGC outlet Fars News described the incident as a “murky story,” questioning the plausibility of a lone or independent attack. The outlet wrote: “It's not normal for individuals to open fire on hundreds of people at a public celebration,” framing the shooting as a product of “widespread anti-Zionist sentiments” and invoking the October 7 attack on Israel.

State-run Mehr News Agency advanced a more explicit accusation. Its headline read: “The primary suspect in the attack on Jews in Australia is the Zionist regime,” presenting the violence as a “false-flag” operation allegedly designed to serve Israeli interests.

IRGC general calls Israel 'sole beneficiary'

The narrative was reinforced by comments from Mohammad Reza Naghdi, a senior IRGC general and top adviser to the force’s chief commander, who publicly argued that Israel was the sole beneficiary of the attack.

In a lengthy statement published by Fars News, Naghdi asked: “Who benefits from the Sydney incident?” before asserting: “The answer is clear. The only one who benefits from the Sydney incident is the Zionist regime.”

Naghdi framed the shooting as a strategic move to suppress pro-Gaza activism in Australia, claiming Sydney had become one of the most prominent centers of “anti-Zionist” demonstrations in the West.

He questioned whether the attack would “facilitate anti-Zionist protests by the people of Sydney or open the hand of the Australian police to suppress them,” and suggested that portraying Jewish communities as unsafe would serve Israeli political goals.

He also raised a series of rhetorical questions about why the attackers targeted civilians and a place of worship rather than Israeli-linked businesses, shipping interests, or Israeli soldiers visiting Australia. “Why were ordinary people and a place of worship targeted?” Naghdi asked, concluding that any act diverting attention from Gaza ultimately “helps the Zionists.”

Outlets often labeled as moderate echoed similar themes in their reporting. Tabnak portrayed the shooting as a “false flag” meant to “revive Israel's antisemitism narrative” and warned of possible repercussions for Tehran, accusing Israel of “seeking to exploit the situation.”

Beyond official outlets and senior figures, Islamic Republic supporters and online commentators circulated celebratory and openly antisemitic reactions, according to social media posts monitored on Sunday. These responses praised the attack or dismissed it as staged, amplifying hostility toward Jews while denying responsibility for the violence.

Australia severed diplomatic ties with Tehran in August, accusing Iran of involvement in threats and attacks against Jewish communities.

Also in November, the country officially designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) as a state sponsor of terrorism.

"As a matter of principle, Iran condemns the violent attack against civilians in Sydney, Australia," Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmail Baqaei said in a post on X.

"Terror violence and mass killing shall be condemned, wherever they're committed, as unlawful and criminal."

Eleven people were killed and 29 were taken to hospital after gunmen opened fire on Jewish people observing Hanukkah at Bondi Beach in Australia, New South Wales Police said.

One of the gunmen has been named as 24-year-old Naveed Akram, who was likely a Muslim man of Pakistani origin, a senior law enforcement official told ABC News.

Australian authorities are investigating whether Iran may be linked to the deadly shooting, according to a Jewish community leader cited by The Times of Israel.

In August, Australia accused Iran of two antisemitic arson attacks and ordered its ambassador to leave the country within seven days.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said intelligence gathered by the Australian Security Intelligence Organization showed Iran had directed attacks on a kosher restaurant in Sydney and a synagogue in Melbourne last year.

“These were extraordinary and dangerous acts of aggression orchestrated by a foreign nation on Australian soil,” Albanese told reporters at the time.

ASIO Director-General Mike Burgess said Iran had “sought to disguise its involvement,” but the agency assessed it was behind the attacks on the Lewis Continental Kitchen in Sydney on 20 October last year, and the Adass Israel Synagogue in Melbourne on 6 December. He said Iran was “likely” behind further incidents targeting Jewish Australians.