In an interview with Al Jazeera
US, Europe defending Zionist crimes despite rights advocacy claims: Pezeshkian
Iran’s President Masoud Pezeshkian was interviewed by Al Jazeera English to discuss international, and regional developments last week in New York on the sidelines of the 79th session of the UN General Assembly. Pezeshkian gave a comprehensive interview to the news channel, addressing questions on the Zionist regime’s escalating crimes in Lebanon, the solution to the Palestinian issue, negotiations to resolve the nuclear dispute, and the expansion of relations with Western countries and cooperation with neighboring states. The partial text of the interview is as follows:
Al Jazeera: How do you see the current tensions between Israel and Hezbollah unfolding, and what are the potential consequences of this escalation? Do you think it will lead to a wider conflict, and if so, what steps could be taken to de-escalate the situation?”
Pezeshkian: What the Zionist regime is doing in the region is, in fact, genocide. Unfortunately, European countries and especially the US are defending these crimes committed by the Zionists. They claim to be champions of human rights and international law, but in no law is it permissible to kill children, women, the elderly, and the young, or to destroy hospitals. These laws are meant to ensure that those who engage in warfare do so with those who are also fighting, not with innocent civilians. The world sees that the US and some European countries are supporting the Zionist regime’s crimes, and it’s truly heartbreaking for me to accept that we live in a world where innocent lives can be taken with impunity.
The Zionists want to expand the war in the Middle East to ensure their own survival, given that they failed to achieve their objectives in Gaza. They thought they could destroy Hamas in a week, but it’s been a year now, and they’ve failed to achieve any of their goals. The Zionist regime has only achieved one thing: destroying an entire city and its people, cutting off their access to water, food, and medicine, while the self-proclaimed defenders of human rights remain silent.
As Muslims, we feel a sense of responsibility towards this issue, and Islamic countries must take a united stance against these crimes and not allow the Zionist regime’s atrocities to continue in Lebanon.
How will Iran balance its support for regional allies with avoiding direct confrontation with Israel and the US?
I think that if Islamic countries were united in their condemnation of the crimes against Muslims in the region, and if they refused to allow American and Zionist bases to carry out these attacks with impunity, the US wouldn’t be able to support the regime so easily and provide it with weapons.
We Islamic countries are to blame for our lack of unity and cohesion. We’re to blame for not standing up for the rights of Muslims in the region and instead fighting among ourselves. This is a major problem. We need to resolve our differences, and regional peace and stability can be achieved through our cooperation and solidarity. We don’t need Americans or other countries to come and create peace in the region. Why should we fear each other and take sides against each other? This is a problem we have, and we need to resolve it among ourselves, with Muslims and Islamic countries, and reassure each other that we’ll support each other.
We’ll work together, and the growth and development of each country will guarantee the growth and development of other countries. If we establish these connections correctly, outsiders will leave the region, and we can create peace and security ourselves.
How do you assess the issue of Israel’s infiltration into Iran’s security infrastructure, which led to the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in Tehran?
It’s not difficult to evaluate. Given their infiltration and the tools at their disposal, it’s unlikely that they haven’t created the groundwork for such incidents in all our countries. It’s unclear whether they haven’t done the same in other Islamic countries, such as Pakistan, Afghanistan, the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, or Turkey, to be used at a later time.
We must understand that the technological tools available today are in the hands of the powerful, and if they so desire, they can extract information, cause explosions, or wreak havoc on these countries. We must realize that the electronic devices we use, including pagers and mobile phones, can be manipulated and used to control or assassinate us. This is exactly what happened, and it was revealed that the claims of international organizations and individuals who advocated for human rights, humanity, and dignity were lies.
This is what we’ve come to understand, and now we must be cautious about the tools they provide us, which can be used for espionage and are carried by us ourselves. It was proven that the pager and mobile phone used by martyr Ismail Haniyeh were compromised, and they could easily manipulate them to do as they pleased. From now on, we’ll try to minimize the use of these tools in our country, especially among sensitive individuals, and use our own domestically produced devices whenever possible.
You officially accused Israel of assassinating Ismail Haniyeh and considered it a breach of Iran’s national security, vowing to respond. Why has there been a delay in this response?
We’ll announce the timing of our response when the time is right. It’s not as if they can do as they please, whenever and wherever they want. What we will do, when we will do it, and what measures we will take will not be announced. We’ll decide the course of action.
The Zionist regime doesn’t mind creating chaos in the region to escape the predicament they’re in, but they won’t do it alone. They have a strong supporter like the US, which claims to advocate for democracy, human rights, and human dignity.
Many of Netanyahu’s actions are aimed at creating war and chaos in the region to escape the disaster that has befallen him. We’ll try to thwart their plans through political means, taking action at the right time and place to prevent them from achieving their goals.
The Zionists did this because, on the day of my inauguration, my focus was on unity with Islamic countries. My goal was to involve all citizens in governing the country. My approach was not to consider anyone in our country a foreigner. They were upset about this, as they want to create divisions and disputes within our government and the Islamic Republic. Our approach would have foiled their plot, and that’s why they did what they did on the day of my inauguration, trying to create a dispute that would prevent us from continuing on our path of peace and security, both domestically and internationally.
That’s why I think that on the very first day that the inauguration process was taking shape, they intentionally created a controversy that would prevent us from pursuing a path of peace and security, both within our country and with our neighbors and the world at large, and that we would fall into the trap they had set for us, leading to the very outcome they had anticipated.
Do you think the American and Israeli goal of cutting off your support for your allies has been achieved?
The problem is not us. Are other Islamic countries satisfied with the situation in Gaza? If they are, then we’ll respond. If Muslims in various countries, such as the UAE, Bahrain, Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey, and others, are satisfied with the existence of Zionists and their crimes, then we’ll be alone in our support. If that’s the case, we’ll fail, as long as Muslims are alone in this struggle.
It’s possible that the Zionist regime will attack other countries tomorrow, Lebanon today, and Saudi Arabia tomorrow, or any other place they desire. If we’re alone, that’s the situation we’ll face.
We have no interest in getting involved in this process unless we believe that a Muslim has a duty to defend Muslims and human rights. If a Muslim exists in the region and sees Muslims being massacred, and they remain silent, then their Islam is questionable.
So, we’re not alone if we’re truly Muslims. If Islamic countries have this view, they should remove the name of Islam from themselves, so we and other Muslims can understand our duty.
From your perspective, what is the solution to the Gaza issue?
The first step is for Islamic countries to come together and reach a common language and perspective. We must agree that anyone who attacks the Islamic community is an aggressor and must be held accountable internationally. We must not allow them to easily attack Islamic countries and Muslims, and then sit back and watch, saying “what will Iran do?”
As Muslims, when an innocent Muslim is killed, a woman, child, elderly person, or young person, and hospitals are destroyed in this manner, it’s unbearable for any free human being, let alone us, who are Muslims and consider them our brothers.
I firmly believe that the first step towards addressing this issue is for the Islamic countries to unite and collectively condemn the disturbing trend that has emerged in the Middle East, Gaza, and Lebanon. If we all protest together, they won’t dare to do this easily. But if they think Iran should respond and others should just watch, the Zionist regime won’t mind, and then we’ll be at odds with each other.
Are you prepared to support a two-state solution, and do you believe it’s a viable solution to the Israeli-Palestinian issue?
That’s their responsibility. If the Palestinians who are there have come to the conclusion that they should act in this way, we have no problem with it. In fact, our problem is that we don’t want to tolerate the injustice, oppression, and cruelty inflicted on Muslims. They must determine their own fate, and we’ll respect whatever decision they make.
The solution we think is right is to hold a referendum, based on the democracy they claim to defend, and let everyone vote. Whatever the outcome, we’ll respect it.
To what extent are you prepared to create new grounds for dialogue with the West, based on which sanctions could be lifted, and is this a priority for your government at present?
We have no fight with anyone. We want what is rightfully ours, and we’re ready to talk to anyone we need to in this regard.
We’re committed to what we signed and agreed upon. We’re not seeking nuclear bombs, and we’re not looking to develop them. What we’re doing is for our own defense, so we can protect ourselves if someone like the Zionist regime comes along and wants to bomb us at will. If those in Gaza and Lebanon had the ability to defend themselves, the Zionist regime wouldn’t dare to kill innocent people so easily. Because they have no defensive capabilities, or the tools they have are no match for the Zionist regime’s capabilities, the Zionists feel emboldened to kill everyone, cut off their access to water, food, and medicine, and the world just watches, and no one defends them.
We don’t want to be defenseless in the world, and that’s why we’re doing what we’re doing to increase our defensive capabilities and ensure our security, so they don’t dare to attack us so easily. We’ve never been interested in starting a war with any country, and we never will be. Look at Iran’s history 100 or 200 years ago; we’ve never initiated a war. We believe we should live in peace and security with our neighbors in the region. This is what we’re after, to sit down with the world and talk, and for them to be assured that we’re not seeking nuclear bombs. Since we don’t want to pursue such things, we have no problem with inspection and evaluation. However, it’s not that they can dictate what we should do, and then not uphold their own commitments. We’ll uphold our commitments, and they should uphold theirs, and then we’ll discuss the rest.
Are you willing to give concessions to make such a dialogue possible?
What concessions? We will engage in dialogue as equals. They should respect us, and we will respect them. If they don’t respect us and try to humiliate us, we won’t accept humiliation.
Today, even in the UN, the debate on development and peace is ongoing. If they want to humiliate us, we, as Muslims, prefer death over humiliation and won’t accept it. However, on an equal basis, within the framework of international norms, we’ll sit down and talk, and we’ll cooperate on what’s beneficial for the world, for us, and for them.
Have there been any direct or indirect talks between you and the US government, aside from the issues related to Gaza, security cooperation, or the nuclear issue?
There have been indirect talks on the nuclear issue, and discussions are ongoing. We’re also willing to talk to European countries again. We’re not looking for war, we’re not looking for insecurity, we’re not terrorists. They’re the terrorists who come to countries and kill people in front of everyone’s eyes, and then say they’ve killed terrorists.
Do you support talks with the US, regardless of who wins the next election, Kamala Harris or Donald Trump?
We have no problem with dialogue, but those who engaged in dialogue did not adhere to it. Since they intervened in the region, they have always tried to create problems for us, from the behavior on August 19, [1953] against [prime minister] Dr. Mossadegh to the current events. Whenever an issue arises in our country, they start supporting those who want to overthrow the government and attempt to undermine our Islamic government or Islamic Republic. Whenever they want to speak to us honestly and sincerely, we will have no problem with such discussions. However, unfortunately, we have not seen this honesty in the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), and it is the same in other areas as well.
We signed the JCPOA, but they (Americans) ripped it up. We were fulfilling our obligations, and they (IAEA) were monitoring us intensively every day. We didn’t obstruct their monitoring efforts. If we had wanted to act differently, we would have blocked their access. But it was the US that unilaterally withdrew from the JCPOA. So, how can we trust them if they sign another agreement, only to tear it up again? Nevertheless, indirect talks are currently underway with some Americans, and they are making progress. However, the outcome depends on the other side’s commitment to the agreement.
If talks between you and the US and the West take place, what issues do you think are suitable for discussion, aside from the nuclear issue?”
We’re a country, and there are international laws and the UN. We don’t want anything except our rights and to be treated according to the law. If they act according to the law, we won’t have a problem with anyone. We don’t have any special demands or requests. They imposed sanctions on us, which are against international law, and they use force to prevent other countries from doing business with us. Other countries are afraid of them and don’t do business with us. That’s the reality we face in the world.
The head of the IAEA recently said he wants to meet with you and has requested deeper cooperation with Iran. Do you have a roadmap to address the agency’s concerns?
The roadmap is already written and approved in the JCPOA. We signed it, and they signed it. We’re committed to it, and they should be committed to it too. We’re ready to follow the same path.
After your election victory, you said that your relations with neighboring countries, especially those in the Persian Gulf, are a priority. How do you plan to pursue this, and how will this path be reflected in the security, political, and economic situation?
Before coming to the United States, I visited Iraq and met with the president and the Kurdistan region. I also visited Basra. Here, I’ve had meetings with the Turkish president and will have meetings with the president of Pakistan. We are interested in holding talks with [officials] from all countries in the region, drafting strategic plans, and exchanging ideas with them. We want to create a win-win situation where we help each other and create a framework for Islamic countries to grow and become self-sufficient, without relying on foreign powers.
We’ll continue to pursue this path and try to increase our connections with other countries, in terms of parliamentary cooperation, judicial cooperation, government cooperation, security cooperation, economic cooperation, social cooperation, and cultural cooperation.