Gharibabadi Outlines Iran’s Conditions for Ceasefire with the U.S. and Israel
WANA (Mar 10) – Kazem Gharibabadi, Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister for Legal and International Affairs, said that negotiation and diplomacy remain tools available to the country under any circumstances, but emphasized that during the latest round of talks with the United States, Iran’s armed forces were instructed not to place hope in the negotiations.
In remarks to Iranian state television, Gharibabadi said that Iran entered the latest negotiations with Washington while fully observing all security and military considerations. He added that from the first day, the country’s armed forces were repeatedly reminded not to rely on the talks.
Reason for Engaging in Talks
Gharibabadi addressed the question of why Iran negotiated again with the United States despite previous armed attacks against Iran carried out during earlier negotiations with the cooperation of Israel.
“Negotiation and diplomacy are tools in any situation,” he said. “In conditions of threat, a country must make optimal and maximum use of its military capabilities while also using other tools such as diplomacy.”
He said the latest round of talks with the United States began with those considerations in mind and that Iran’s armed forces were constantly reminded not to expect results from negotiations.
According to Gharibabadi, the request for negotiations did not originate from Iran. He said the United States repeatedly asked for talks, while several regional leaders contacted Iran’s president and urged Tehran to respond positively to Washington’s requests and enter negotiations.
“We entered negotiations in such an environment,” he said, adding that Iran’s objective was not to reject diplomacy outright, because saying no to diplomacy could itself have consequences.
Nuclear Weapons Allegations
Gharibabadi also rejected accusations that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, calling them a pretext aimed at misleading international public opinion.
He said that for more than three decades, the United States and Israel have accused Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons without ever presenting evidence.
“Which nuclear weapon?” he asked, adding that such accusations are made by states that themselves possess nuclear weapons.
He also referred to the U.S. use of nuclear weapons against civilians in Japan during the Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, saying countries possessing such weapons are now accusing Iran of seeking them.
Historical Roots of Tensions
Gharibabadi said opposition and pressure from the United States and its allies against Iran should be analyzed in two historical periods: since the Iranian Revolution and developments in the region following the October 7 attacks.
He stated that before the revolution, the United States and the United Kingdom had extensive influence over Iran, including control over resources such as oil and influence over the country’s major policies.
Commander of Khatam Headquarters: There Is No End to the War
WANA (Mar 10) – Major General Abdolahi, the commander of the Khatam al-Anbiya (PBUH) Central Headquarters, stated that there is no end to the war, emphasizing that the will of the leadership, the people, and the armed forces is stronger than ever in seeking revenge against the murderous enemies. Major General Ali Abdolahi, commander […]
According to Gharibabadi, losing such a position has been difficult for Western powers, especially for figures like U.S. President Donald Trump and those around him, whom he described as highly focused on financial issues, energy resources, and oil.
He also referred to U.S. policy toward Venezuela, saying Washington initially frames actions around issues such as combating criminal networks, drug trafficking, democracy, or human rights, but later reveals what he described as its real objectives.
Regional Developments
Gharibabadi said one of the roots of confrontation with Iran lies in the country’s independence following the revolution, which he said was also embedded as a fundamental principle in Iran’s constitution.
He added that after regional developments following the October 7 attacks, some believed events involving groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, as well as developments in Lebanon and Syria, had created an opportunity to increase pressure on Iran.
According to him, this assumption was tested during what he described as the “12-day war,” when the opposing side faced what he called a strong response from the Islamic Republic of Iran.
He added that afterward other strategies were pursued to pressure Iran, including attempts to create internal unrest and undermine national unity.
Ceasefire Contacts
Gharibabadi also said several countries have contacted Iran regarding efforts to stop the fighting.
According to him, countries including China, Russia, and France, along with several regional states, have been in contact with Tehran. He added that other Islamic and non-Islamic countries have also called for steps to stop the war or establish a ceasefire.
He said Iran’s position remains clear: the country did not start the war and considers its actions to be legitimate self-defense.
Legal Basis for Iran’s Actions
Gharibabadi said Iran’s actions are carried out within the framework of the right to self-defense under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter.
He explained that the charter outlines conditions under which self-defense may end, including assurances that aggressive actions will not be repeated.
According to him, a country that has been attacked will continue its defensive actions until it is certain that such aggression will not happen again.
“If a ceasefire is to be established or the war is to stop,” he said, “there must be guarantees that aggressive actions against Iran will not be repeated. Otherwise, if another attack occurs after a few months, such a ceasefire would be meaningless.”
People attend a gathering to support Iran’s new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei, amid the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran, in Tehran, Iran, March 9, 2026. Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency)
