Leader’s remarks on nuclear weapons, US talks
Following is the text of the Leader’s speech:
I am telling you, the US officials are irrational people. Their remarks are illogical. Their deeds are illogical [and] tyrannical.
They expect others to give in to their illogical demands and bullying. Some do so. Certain governments and some political elites in certain countries give in to the American officials’ chutzpah and bullying. But the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic cannot be forced into surrender. The Islamic Republic has argument and logic; it’s capable and powerful. Hence, it will not accept illogical words and actions. In what way are the American officials irrational? A sign that shows they are irrational is the contradictions between what they preach and what they practice. They say something and act in a different way.
They claim they are committed to human rights. Yes, the Americans are bearing the flag of human rights and claim they are committed to human rights not only in their own country, that is, the US, but in the whole world. This is merely a claim. How about in practice? In practice, they deal the heaviest blows to and show the highest disrespect for human rights in other nations; their secret jails [are spread] across the world [from] Guantanamo Bay Prison [to] Abu Ghraib Prison in Iraq; their attacks on civilians [continue] in Afghanistan, Pakistan and other countries. Their drones take off to spy [on other nations] and also exert pressure on people. You hear news [of US drone attacks] from Afghanistan and Pakistan on a daily basis. However, the unmanned aerial vehicles, as an American magazine wrote the other day, will cause trouble for the Americans themselves in future.
The American officials claim they are committed to nuclear non-proliferation, which provided the pretext for their invasion of Iraq eleven years ago. They said the Saddam regime was developing nuclear bombs in Iraq. They unearthed no weapons in that country and it became manifest that their claim was a lie. They say they are committed to nonproliferation of nuclear weapons. In the meantime, they support an evil regime, which is armed with nuclear bombs and makes threats [against others] with the weapons, that is, the Zionist regime. That’s what they preach and this is how they practice.
They claim they are committed to promoting democracy in the world. That is what they preach. I am not going to elaborate on the nature of the US democracy itself. I am not going to discuss that. Based on this claim, they constantly oppose and counter a nation like the Islamic Republic of Iran, which is the most transparent and the clearest democracy in the region. In the meantime, they throw their weight behind some states in the same region that do not know anything about democracy at all and that their people have not witnessed a single election or ballot box and they shamelessly support such governments. This is how they are committed to democracy.
They claim they want to settle their differences with Iran. They have made the claim many times and they are doing so more now. “We want to resolve our disputes with Iran;” this is what they say. In practice, they resort to sanctions and false propaganda. They make inappropriate remarks. They constantly level false allegations against the Islamic Republic and the Iranian nation.
Several days ago, the US president made a speech about Iran’s nuclear program and spoke as if the dispute between Iran and the US were because Tehran wanted to build nuclear arms. They say they will do their utmost to prevent Iran from developing an atomic weapon. If we wanted to build nuclear arms, how could you stop us [from doing so]? If Iran intended to build nukes, the US would never be able to stop it. We are not seeking to build nuclear weapons not because the US is unhappy about it. That’s our own belief.
We believe that nuclear weapon is a crime against humanity and should not be produced. [We also believe] all nuclear arms must be eliminated worldwide. This is our own belief. It has nothing to do with you. If we did not believe in this and decided to build nuclear weapons, no power could prevent us, just as they failed to prevent [other countries from building nuclear weapons] in other parts of the world. They failed [to prevent the production of nuclear arms] in India, Pakistan, and North Korea. They opposed, but those countries built nuclear bombs. The claim that they will not allow Iran to make nuclear arms is a diversion from the main argument. Is the dispute over nuclear weapons?
In the nuclear issue, the question is not nuclear weapons. The issue is that you want to deprive the Iranian people of an inalienable and undeniable right, which is the nation’s right to nuclear enrichment and peaceful use of its domestic capability. Of course, you will not be able [to do so]. And the Iranian nation will exercise its right. You see, they are irrational. The US officials speak illogically. One cannot speak on the basis of logic with an irrational side. They are irrational. Irrational means [one who is] bullying, [one who] talks nonsense. It’s a reality that over the past 30 years we have clearly realized in dealing with different international issues. We know who we are facing and how we should deal with them.
The second point is that the US has raised the issue of talks. They invite Iran to negotiation. Their illogical behavior is also visible in the invitation to talks. They do not have the intention of resolving problems and issues. I will explain later. Their purpose [in inviting Iran to talks] is propaganda. They want to tell Muslim nations “Look! This is the Islamic Republic which, despite its stubbornness and resistance, was finally forced to adopt a conciliatory approach and enter into talks with us. When the Iranian nation is like this, what are you going to say?” [They want to tell] this to the nations who have risen up in Muslim countries where the breeze of awakening is blowing today.
And these nations feel honored thanks to Islam. [The US] needs this to silence and disappoint them. Since the [victory of] the Islamic Revolution, this was one of their goals. Since the early years after the Islamic Revolution, one of their aims was to bring Iran to the negotiating table and win a compromise to say later “There you go. Iran, which claimed it was independent, was steadfast, was brave was finally forced to come to the negotiating table.”
They are pursuing this goal today. This is an important issue. When talks are aimed at something irrelevant to basic issues and are merely for propaganda purposes, it’s clear that the other side, that is, the Islamic Republic is not inexperienced, is not blind, and it knows what your real aim is. [Iran] gives a response to you in proportion with your intention. This is another point. Thirdly, talks for Americans and other hegemonic powers mean “Let’s negotiate so until you accept our demands.” This is the aim of the negotiations. “Let’s negotiate so that the outcome of the talks will be you giving in to what you refused to accept previously.”
Right now, in their propaganda over talks [with Iran] you have certainly heard [that] the Americans have created a furor, saying, “Let’s negotiate with Iran; let’s engage in direct talks [with Iran].” It’s also clearly visible in their statements today. [They say] “Let’s sit [at the talks] to convince Iran to stop enrichment, to give up nuclear energy.” That’s their goal. They don’t say “Let’s negotiate so that Iran will present its argument [and] we will lift pressures over the nuclear issue, lift the sanctions, stop security, political and other interferences [in Iran].” They don’t say that.
They [Western states] say “Let’s negotiate, so that Iran will give in to our demands.”
Well, such negotiations are futile.
Such talks will get nowhere, even if the Iranian government accepts [the offer] and [Iranians officials] sit at the negotiating table with the Americans. When that is the goal, what kind of dialog is this? It is obvious that Iran will not relinquish its rights.
They pretend in their propaganda that if Iran sits at the negotiating table with the US, they will lift the sanctions. This is also a lie. By promising to lift the sanctions, they just aim to make the Iranian nation show eagerness to enter into talks with the US. Their understanding is that the Iranian people are fed-up with the sanctions, [that] they are suffering a lot, [and that] everything is a mess; [the Americans say to themselves] “We will tell [Iran] ‘All right, let’s negotiate so that we will lift the sanctions’.” [And they think] the Iranian nation will march and call for talks [with the US]. This is also another illogical statement [on the part of the US] which is laced with deception and is a tool for bullying.
Firstly, as I said, when they invite [Iran] to talks, they do not mean a dialog on fair and logical terms. By talks, they mean “You must give in to our demands, to surrender [and] then we will lift the sanctions.” If the Islamic Republic and the Iranian nation wanted to surrender, why did they stage a revolution? The US was dominating Iran [before the Islamic Revolution] and did whatever it desired. The Iranian people staged an uprising to break free from the yoke of the US. Do you expect them to surrender to you again?
Yes, sanctions mean pressure. There is no doubt. They are painful. But there are two ways to ease the pain. When weak nations come under pressure, they surrender to the enemy; they buckle; they repent. But a brave nation like the Iranian people, upon noticing that the enemy is exerting pressure, will try to activate its internal forces and cross the danger zone strongly and courageously. And they will certainly do so.
The Americans [must] prove they do not bully [Iran]; they must prove they do not stir mischief; they must show that they do not speak and act illogically; they must prove that they respect the rights of the Iranian people; they must show that they do not spark fires in the region; they must prove that they will not interfere in the Iranian nation’s affairs, just as they did during the 2009 sedition [when they] supported the seditionists [and] provided them with social networking websites; one of the websites in those days planned to shut down for maintenance, [the American officials] said “Don’t shut down” with the aim of influencing the sedition and sedition flame; if they stop doing such things, they will see that the Islamic Republic is a well-wishing system, the [Iranian] people are rational. This is the one and only way to interact with the Islamic Republic.
Something [recently] happened in the parliament. It was an unfortunate event. It was inappropriate. It saddened the nation and the elite alike. I felt sad for two reasons. I feel sad about the issue myself. One becomes also sad when he sees the people are unhappy [about the issue]. Well, the head of a branch of the government, based on an allegation that has not been proven at court, leveled accusations against the other two branches. This was a bad deed, an inappropriate act. Such acts run counter to religion; they are also illegal and immoral. Meanwhile, these acts are an encroachment upon the rights of people. One of the basic rights of people is that they should enjoy psychological security as well as moral security in the country.
When someone else is accused of corruption, one cannot blame others, even if the corruption case has been proven [at court], let alone a situation in which allegations have not even been proven, [the person] has not appeared before the court neither has there been a legal proceeding. Based on allegations against someone else, one comes and levels accusations against the parliament and the judiciary. That is not right. It’s wrong. For the time being, I content myself with giving pieces of advice. The Islamic Republic does not deserve that.
On the other hand, the impeachment motion itself at the parliament [involving the former minister of labor] was a wrong move. Impeachment should yield benefits. A few months before the end of [this] government’s term, a minister is impeached on grounds unrelated to him. What does this mean? Why? That was also wrong. I also heard that some people made inappropriate remarks in the parliament. That was also wrong. All such moves are unbecoming to the Islamic Republic; neither the allegations, nor the response, and the impeachment. The head of the [legislative] branch [also] went too far in his reaction. It was unnecessary. When we are all brothers, when we are facing a common enemy, when we are witnessing the conspiracy, what are we supposed to do?
To date, the officials have stood united in the face of [enemy] plots. They should continue to do so. It should always be like that. I have always supported the heads of the branches of the government and the officials. I will continue to back anyone who is shouldering responsibility and I will help them. But I do not approve of such behaviors. These behaviors do not accord with obligations and with taken oaths. They should look at this great nation.
This nation deserves a different behavior. Today, officials should try their best to untie economic knots; to solve problems. They should focus all their energy and efforts on sound economic policies; both the Executive and the parliament. Several years ago, I sent a letter to the heads of the branches of the government about economic corruption. Well, fight economic corruption. Words will not end the problem. Fight corruption through actions. [It’s useless if] we frequently speak about economic corruption. Well, what measures have been taken? What did you do? These are what make one sad.
I expect officials to boost their friendship because enemies have intensified their behaviors [against the Iranian nation]. I call on them to close ranks more tightly.
About The Author
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.