Negotiation is not under the maximum pressure and a dignified and wise threat/ We are committed to finding a diplomatic solution to lifting sanctions

According to RCO News Agency, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Islamic Republic of Iran has published a leaf statement on the hostile actions of the new US government, as follows:

The US president issued an order to revive a failed policy called “maximum pressure” against the Iranian nation on February 7, 2008, signing a “National Security Presidential” note.

The US government claims to revive maximum pressure, but the maximum pressure had never stopped today to revive the former US government not halt even one of the sanctions imposed in the past, and has added hundreds of sanctions to past sanctions.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has shown that it responds and responds with maximum resistance and strongly believes that no nation should be subject to unjust pressure and illegal sanctions.

American hypocritical approach

While signing the document, the US president spoke of his willingness to discuss and agree with Iran on the nuclear issue, with a document revitalizing a policy called maximum pressure as the Honorable President of the Islamic Republic of Iran, making all possible conspiracies to confront Iran and intensify pressure on Iran. The Iranian people have put on the agenda.

The Islamic Republic of Iran has always supported diplomatic solutions to various issues, including the nuclear issue, and over the past two decades has proven its commitment to diplomacy and solutions.

At the same time, the historical background evokes that the Iranian nation will never accept the negotiation under pressure and that unilateral conditions, intimidation and threat to the Islamic Republic have and will not be held accountable.

Coinciding with the order of intensifying pressure on the Iranian nation and expressing a will to dialogue and agreement only reflects the continuation of the hypocritical approach that has long been on the agenda of US governments towards Iran.

Washington’s insistence on this dual approach not only helps solve issues but also adds to the depth of mistrust of American intentions and policies.

US history

The US government expresses a tendency to discuss its obligations, especially on the UN Security Council, in order to deal with Iran.

Today, the president speaks of the conversation and transaction that he himself unilaterally ordered the United States to exit and put the most severe pressure on the Iranian nation. Its widespread nuclear obligations were.

Even before that, the failure to fully fully fulfill the US obligations had prevented the Islamic Republic of Iran completely benefit from the benefits and benefits of lifting sanctions as it was anticipated.

With all these interpretations, Iran continued to fully fulfill its obligations within its long -standing commitment to diplomacy for a year after the US withdrawal, and ultimately only within the framework of the rights of the Brigham and in an attempt to revive diplomacy, a set of compensation steps. He removed the nuclear area and stopped the implementation of the actions in the Brigham.

Over the past four years, despite the intensive conversations to revive the Brajam Washington, despite the verbal desire to return to the agreement, he has never refused to return to its obligations and lift sanctions against the Iranian nation, and every time it is prevented from preventing the pretext. It turned out that the negotiations for the revival of the Brjam would achieve the final result.

In fact, the experience of the Brajam agreement can be described as a mirror of all the dual American behavior towards Iran.

The position of the Islamic Republic of Iran on today’s dual approach is American derived from this historical experience.

History of US Historical Back on Iran

The US government’s behavioral history towards the Iranian government and the great nation of Iran is aware of the distrust of the continuation of arrogance, threat and intimidation, repeated internal interventions, the launch of national resources and wealth under various headings, deprived the Iranian nation of conventional commercial opportunities. The way sanctions, imposing war, resorting to all kinds of terrorism, especially economic terrorism, are adventurous and many other inhumane and cruel issues.

These measures are not compatible with any human criteria as well as international law and regulations. The implementation of the coup against the Iranian legal government on August 7, the blocking of all Iranian assets in the early days of the Islamic Revolution, security and logistical support for Saddam’s Ba’athist regime during the eight -year imposed war, attacking oil platforms, attacking Iranian passenger plane The name of the Mojahedin from the list of terrorist groups, intimidation and extradition of the Iranians through their arrest and extradition, withdrawal from the nuclear deal, the head of the national hero of the martyr Sardar Sardar Sardar Sardar Sardar Sardar, the imposition of overseas sanctions, and the widespread targeting of Iranian citizens. The way these sanctions and involvement in the assassination of Iran’s nuclear scientists through supporting the Zionist regime are only part of these hostile actions and behaviors.

According to history, today’s situation in the US -Iran relations is the result of a set of hostile actions that Washington has pursued for nearly a century against the Iranian nation.

Washington cannot change historical facts by accusing Iran and representing Iran responsible.

US history of supporting terrorism and instability in the region

The United States, while accusing the Islamic Republic of Iran of supporting terrorism, is the largest victim of terrorism in the world, and no country has fought as much as the Iranian nation and its armed forces against the emergence of this ominous phenomenon in the West Asian region.

Iran has sacrificed many dear lives to support and defend the nations of the region against violent and ruthless terrorism, and has always prioritized peace and peace in the region.

On the other hand, within the country, various terrorist groups created by the US and some other countries have killed more than 6,000 innocent people.

The United States, despite its claim to fight terrorism, has actually been a sponsor, a sponsor, and a cause of terrorism and instability in the West Asian region, as today’s US president has repeatedly acknowledged US campaigns in the region on the pretext of fighting against terrorism in Iraq and in Iraq. Afghanistan has had nothing but instability and growth of terrorist groups.

The United States, not in the plaintiff’s position, but in the accused position, must answer the question of who has been the cause of terrorist groups and the funding and weapons of dangerous groups such as al -Qaeda ISIS and al -Nusra in the past decades? The United States has shown that terrorist groups are a tool to advance their goals and policies against countries, including in the region.

The label of support for terrorism on the support of the Iranian nation’s support for the resistance groups and the Muslim nations of the region who fight for the freedom of their land and human dignity against a usurped occupation regime does not change reality.

Charming the Islamic Republic of Iran is an inefficient effort to deprive the Zionist regime and to escape the burden of its responsibility in the comprehensive and absolute support of its regime’s crimes.

US human rights claims

The United States has accused the Islamic Republic of human rights, which itself has not only supported the genocide and war crimes of the Zionist regime in Gaza but also supported these actions, and now the destruction of the Zionist regime’s criminal attacks is also proclaimed to migrate to The Palestinians have put their lands and land usurages.

The claim of supporting the Iranian people and human rights is while Washington has been targeting the Iranian nation’s economy and welfare directly for many years, referring to economic pressure on the Iranian nation as a first round of campaign.

It is not rejected that the US government was trying to intensify economic pressure on the Iranian nation, as the Iranian people were struggling with the epidemic of Corona.

According to international reports, US sanctions have targeted not only the economy but the fundamental right of Iranian life so that many lives have been lost due to restrictions on cruel sanctions.

With such a background, the United States cannot place itself in the position of a claimant in human rights.

It is not clear to anyone that Washington has nothing to do with the intensity of the Human Rights claims except to exacerbate the pressure on the same nation that is concerned about, and this is another sign of the US hypocritical approach to Iran.

Global Disability Politics

While the United States has described itself as a supporter of the so -called law -oriented system and has always spoken of the need for adherence to international law, it has stepped down at various times, contrary to international rules and to promote instability worldwide.

Although the United States has always hidden its violations of international laws and rules under seemingly justified literature and slogans such as human rights and the fight against terrorism, today the country has explicitly turned to imperialist and colonial literature by abandoning these compliments. The usurper of other lands in Europe and West Asia and in Latin America does not hide.

In fact, today the United States has become the biggest factor in the rejection of international principles and norms, including respect for territorial integrity and national sovereignty than ever.

The US approach to the Islamic Republic of Iran is also not separate from this colonial mentality and policy.

Rationality, intelligence and dignity

The supreme leader of the revolution, relying on the historical experience and records of the US government’s performance, described negotiating with the United States in today’s situation as “rationality, intelligence and dignity”. Iran has never had a dialogue and has left the negotiating table, but is the negotiation under the maximum pressure and a dignified and wise threat?

It should be remembered that it was America that was negotiated with a multilateral document, leaving the negotiating table, and now, claiming to be ready to negotiate the same policy by resorting to the inefficient approach of maximum pressure.

In the same context, the Islamic Republic of Iran, while adhering to the three principles of “dignity, wisdom and expediency” in its foreign policy, believes that negotiations with an American who today explicitly puts a copy of all -out pressure on the Iranian nation and explicitly put Iran to Iran. Military action threatens, it will not serve Iran’s national interests.

In the context of its religious and strategic considerations, the Islamic Republic of Iran has never been on the agenda of the construction of weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, and the fatwa of the supreme leader in this regard is a certain certificate of commitment.

The United States, as the sole use of nuclear weapons in history, cannot and should not turn the nuclear issue into an excuse to oppose the Iranian nation.

Iran is still committed to finding a diplomatic solution to the rights of the Iranian nation and lifting sanctions and will continue to consult with the relevant parties, while utilizing all elements of its national power to respond and deal with threats.

The Islamic Republic of Iran is a propulsion of peace in the region and the world and does not seek pressure and threat to any party, but if one wishes to threaten Iran, it will be responded to it.

The Islamic Republic of Iran will not doubt in response to any attack on national security and will respond to any action against Iran.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs will take steps from the position of power to comply with the statements and recommendations of the supreme leader with open eyes and with a thorough understanding of the nature of the other parties in the path of dignified diplomacy aimed at securing the interests of the great Iranian nation.

The end of the message