Iran’s former FM says US was hostile from day one

Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said that if Washington attacks Iran, Tehran would not be able to strike US territory but would target American military bases in the region.

“If Washington attacks us, there is no possibility of attacking US soil, but we will attack their bases in the region,” Araghchi said.

Araghchi said Iran’s nuclear file could only be resolved through negotiations and that the recent talks with Washington were held indirectly and focused solely on the nuclear issue.

He said the United States returned to negotiations after pressuring Iran with threats of military strikes, adding that Iran considers enrichment its inalienable right and that zero enrichment was outside the framework of talks.

Araghchi said Iran’s level of uranium enrichment depends on its needs and that enriched uranium would not be transferred out of the country.

He also ruled out negotiations over Iran’s missile program “now or in the future,” and said the path of talks must be free of threats or pressure.

Araghchi said no date had yet been set for a second round of negotiations, adding that while the talks were indirect, there was an opportunity for a brief handshake with the US delegation.

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian said on Sunday that talks between Iran and the United States marked a step forward.

“Dialogue has always been our strategy for a peaceful resolution,” he wrote on X. “The Iran-US talks that were held with the follow-up of friendly governments in the region were a step forward,” he said.

Pezeshkian said dialogue remained Tehran’s approach to achieving a peaceful settlement of disputes.

Middle East analyst Elizabeth Tsurkov says people close to President Trump believe he is likely to strike Iran, arguing the Islamic Republic’s failure against Israel revealed a “paper tiger” abroad — even as it remains ruthlessly lethal toward its own citizens.

Speaking to Iran International in Washington, Tsurkov, a senior non-resident fellow at the New Lines Institute, said the recent US military buildup in the region is the largest since the 2003 invasion of Iraq and has raised expectations that force may ultimately be used.

“People who know the president personally have told me they believe he will attack,” she said, adding that talks are unlikely to succeed because “the maximum that the Iranian regime is willing to offer is less than what the US is willing to accept.”

Continue reading

Speaking to Iran International in Washington, Tsurkov, a senior non-resident fellow at the New Lines Institute, said the recent US military buildup in the region is the largest since the 2003 invasion of Iraq and has raised expectations that force may ultimately be used.

“People who know the president personally have told me they believe he will attack,” she said, adding that talks are unlikely to succeed because “the maximum that the Iranian regime is willing to offer is less than what the US is willing to accept.”

Talks between Iran and the United States were held on Friday, with multiple back-and-forth exchanges taking place both through an Omani mediator in Muscat and reportedly in face-to-face meetings.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman said the talks concluded with an agreement to keep negotiations going, after both sides outlined their positions.

'Paper tiger'

Tsurkov said Iran’s performance in its June conflict with Israel underscored the limits of its ability to harm a capable adversary.

“Iran was doing their best to kill Israelis and damage infrastructure, but killed around 30 people and failed to hit targets that could have altered the conflict, such as facilities producing air-defense missiles,” she said. “Israel, by contrast, destroyed missile production sites and struck nuclear facilities inside Iran.”

"I think after the 12-days war with Israel, uh, there's a uh um there's a term was coined that they are paper tigers... they are a paper tiger to the outside world."

The United States held five rounds of negotiations with Tehran over its disputed nuclear program last year, for which Trump set a 60-day ultimatum.

When no agreement was reached by the 61st day, Israel launched a surprise military offensive on June 13, followed by US strikes on June 22 targeting key nuclear facilities in Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow.

Hundreds of military personnel and civilians were killed in the Israeli airstrikes. Tehran responded by launching more than 500 ballistic missiles and 1,100 drones, killing 32 Israeli civilians and one off-duty soldier and causing widespread damage.

A ceasefire ended the 12-day conflict, but the fate of nearly 400 kilograms of near weapons grade enriched uranium is still unknown. Tehran has said it will not give up the uranium stockpiles.

Tsurkov, who was held from 2023 to 2025 by Iran-backed militias in Iraq, said the conflict exposed a familiar pattern.

“The militias in Iraq pose a significant threat to the Iraqi people. They have killed thousands of innocent Iraqis, Shia and Sunni,” she said.

“They’ve killed only a couple of Israelis with a drone attack. The same with the Iranian regime: it managed to kill around 30 Israelis and really did try to kill more. But when it comes to the Iranian people, when you are facing unarmed protesters, you can just mow them down and kill tens of thousands in the span of about two days.”

‘Desperate protesters’

Tsurkov said the Islamic Republic is now in an “extreme moment of weakness,” pointing to reports that Tehran may be willing to negotiate not only over its nuclear program but also over missiles and proxy militias.

“Iranians have tried voting, only to see elections forged. They have tried peaceful protest and were slaughtered,” she said. “When all avenues are closed, people either leave or become radicalized.”

Last month, Iran International reported that more than 36,500 Iranians were killed by security forces during the January 8–9 crackdown on nationwide protests, making it the deadliest two-day protest massacre in the country’s history.

“When people love their country but still hope foreign powers will bomb it just to free them, that is the clearest sign of utterly failed leadership,” Tsurkov said.

“The solution to the suffering of Iranians and to the security threats that emanate from Iran is the end of this regime,” she said. “It is not easy and it will not happen quickly, but that should be the goal guiding policy.”

Domestic accounts—fragmentary and difficult to verify under heavy censorship—suggest that killings may be continuing beyond those reported during the nationwide unrest of January 8 and 9, when security forces opened fire on demonstrators in cities across the country.

One case frequently cited by rights activists involves Mohammad-Amin Aghilizadeh, a teenager detained in Fooladshahr in central Iran.

According to activists who followed the case, judicial authorities initially demanded bail for his release. Days later, his family was instead given his body, bearing signs of a gunshot wound to the head.

In another case, Javad Molaverdi was wounded by pellet fire during protests in Karaj, detained by security forces, and transferred to Ghezel Hesar Prison. His family later discovered his body in a cemetery, rights activists said.

Such cases have prompted warnings from international monitors. The United Nations special rapporteur on Iran, Mai Sato, has said she is closely following reports suggesting that executions and deaths in custody may be used to instill fear.

‘Doesn’t add up’

One of the most striking accounts received recently by Iran International comes from a journalist inside the country who described a conversation with a ritual washer working at a cemetery in Tehran province.

The journalist met the worker on January 27 and described him as visibly shaken, despite years of professional exposure to death. The washer told the journalist that the official reports “didn’t add up” for some bodies delivered to the cemetery.

“They bring a body that was clearly killed less than two days ago,” the worker said, “but say it has been in storage for 15 days because it was unidentified.”

“We have seen every kind of body for years—traffic accidents, heart attacks,” the worker added. “We can tell the difference. We know.”

Professionals working in forensic medicine and cemetery washing facilities often develop, over time, the ability to estimate time of death based on physical signs, even without laboratory tools.

Worrying precedents

The significance of the testimony lies not only in its emotional impact but in what it suggests about discrepancies between official explanations and physical evidence.

Such accounts cannot, on their own, establish a nationwide pattern. But taken together with reported cases of deaths in custody, they have intensified fears among activists that the authorities may be sending a broader message to protesters: that survival is no longer assured once dissent reaches detention centers.

Those fears are shaped in part by historical precedent.

Documented cases of extrajudicial killings in Iranian prisons—most notably in the early years after the 1979 revolution and during the 1988 mass executions—have heightened sensitivity to any signs that repression may again be moving out of public view.

The evidence gathered so far remains incomplete and uneven. But rights activists say it is sufficient to raise serious concern that deaths in custody and quiet executions may be occurring after protests have been suppressed.