Iran open to diplomacy despite US-Israeli strikes, Pezeshkian says

Iran’s state broadcaster has openly challenged Pezeshkian’s stance on the claims, airing local testimonies that directly contradict the president’s position.

On July 7, the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcasting (IRIB)—controlled by ultra-hardliners—aired a segment featuring residents of border towns in Ardabil Province, near the Azerbaijani frontier.

Locals claimed they had seen Israeli aircraft and drones enter Iranian airspace from Azerbaijan during the war.

The segment aired just hours after Pezeshkian appeared to downplay the allegations, in remarks seemingly aimed at de-escalation and alignment with Baku’s denials. Speaking in Gilan Province, the president said:

“Contrary to some rumors, the country’s security institutions have not confirmed any sign of military cooperation between neighboring countries and the Zionist regime.”

His comments echoed a June 26 phone call with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev, in which, according to Iran’s foreign ministry, Aliyev assured Pezeshkian that using Azerbaijani territory against Iran was a “red line” that would not be crossed.

Yet the very need for such reassurances revealed Tehran’s underlying anxiety—rooted in precedent. In 2012, Iranian officials accused Israel of launching surveillance drones from Azerbaijani bases.

Hardliners seize on the report

The IRIB footage quickly gained traction on conservative media and Iranian social platforms.

Alef News republished the segment with the headline: “Clear Proof of Aliyev Regime’s Involvement in Iran-Israel War: Israeli Fighter Jets Entered Iran from Azerbaijan.”

“There’s no need for the interviews—radars recorded everything,” one widely liked comment read, implying the state was turning a blind eye. Another popular post criticized Pezeshkian’s warm greeting of Aliyev at last week’s ECO Summit in Baku.

Hardline outlets circulated clips of the president smiling and rising to greet Aliyev, accusing him of projecting weakness.

Farhikhtegan daily, tied to conservative factions, called his demeanor “undiplomatic” and “inappropriate.”

Scapegoat for military failures?

Even traditionally moderate conservative papers joined the backlash.

“Baku’s leaders must understand that no one in Iran will forgive a neighbor that betrays this nation,” Jomhouri Eslami warned on July 6. “They must prove they did not collaborate with the Zionist regime—or be prepared to face consequences.”

The paper also accused Azerbaijani media of launching a coordinated propaganda campaign against Iran during the conflict.

What many of Pezeshkian’s critics omit, however, is that the president has no command over the armed forces or intelligence services.

Responsibility for monitoring and responding to foreign threats rests with parallel institutions, making him an easy scapegoat for failures beyond his remit.

Baku has pushed back forcefully.

On July 1, Azerbaijan’s Milli Majlis Commission on Combating Foreign Interference condemned what it called a “deliberate disinformation campaign” by actors in Iran and abroad, aimed at inflaming anti-Azerbaijani sentiment on Persian-language social media.

Ties strained but intact

Despite the intensifying rhetoric, Tehran and Baku continue to preserve key ties. Cooperation persists on infrastructure and energy, including the Rasht-Astara railway and regional gas swap agreements.

Still, deep mistrust lingers—especially over the proposed Zangezur Corridor, which would link Azerbaijan to Nakhchivan through Armenian territory.

Baku views it as a vital trade route to Turkey and Central Asia, while Tehran fears it could undermine its regional leverage and sever its land access to Armenia.

"The so-called snapback mechanism has no legal or political basis," Baghaei said during his weekly press briefing. "In light of recent developments, resorting to such a mechanism is more unfounded than ever and lacks any legal, political, or ethical justification."

Baghaei stressed that Iran still considers itself a signatory of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), despite reducing its commitments in response to what he described as "blatant violations" by the United States and European parties. The US pulled out of the 2015 agreement in 2018 under President Donald Trump's first administration.

“Our reduction of commitments was a response one year after the illegal withdrawal of the US from the JCPOA,” he said. “The European parties themselves also violated their obligations under the deal and failed to act accordingly. Therefore, they have no standing to invoke the mechanism.” He did not elaborate on how the EU violated the deal.

He said the move to activate the snapback clause, originally embedded in UN Security Council Resolution 2231, was "just an instrument of political pressure" and "will be met with a proportionate and appropriate response by Iran."

He dismissed the European threats as lacking "any legal justification" and said, "They must be held accountable for the consequences of their own failures. If they had adhered to their commitments honestly, today’s situation would have been different.”

Earlier in June, France’s Foreign Minister Jean-Noël Barrot said, “France, together with its European partners, can, with a simple letter, reimpose a global embargo on weapons, nuclear equipment, and banking and insurance sectors in Iran, which were lifted 10 years ago.”

Under UN Security Council Resolution 2231, any current JCPOA party—France, Germany, the UK, Russia, or China—can file a non-compliance complaint. If no resolution to maintain sanctions relief is adopted within 30 days, all previous UN sanctions automatically snap back, including cargo inspections, arms embargoes, and missile-related restrictions.

Iran accuses Germany of double standards

The spokesman also criticized Germany and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), alleging selective enforcement of nuclear non-proliferation obligations and supporting Israeli military actions.

“Germany’s hosting of US nuclear weapons is in clear violation of its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT),” Baghaei stated. “We know that a significant number of US nuclear warheads are stationed in Germany, which itself is enough to show a breach of international commitments.”

He added, “Despite this, we witness Germany taking an incorrect stance and supporting violations of international law by backing Israeli military actions. This support carries international responsibility.”

Just days after Iran expelled the UN watchdog, Baghaei also accused the IAEA of "instrumental and selective behavior" in addressing nuclear issues, saying the agency has become part of a broader political toolset, in particular, giving information to the US and Israel which Iran says helped strikes launched against Iran's nuclear facilities last month.

Iran also criticized the IAEA for not condoning the strikes on the country's three main nuclear facilities. “The peaceful nuclear facilities of Iran are being targeted militarily, while the agency remains silent on clear violations by other countries,” he said.

On reports of Russia allegedly pushing Iran to agree to "zero enrichment" levels, Baghaei called the claims “fabricated” and aimed at “damaging Iran’s ties with its partners.” He said that “Russia knows well that Iran makes independent decisions regarding its nuclear policy, and they have always respected that.”

No date for talks, no proposals from allies

Regarding the resumption of nuclear negotiations, Baghaei said no time or location has been set for future talks but confirmed ongoing consultations with China and Russia.

“We maintain strategic relations with both countries and are in close contact with them,” he said. “While no specific proposals have been presented, both China and Russia have consistently expressed readiness to help resolve the nuclear issue.”

He cited “positive discussions” between Iranian and Russian officials during the recent BRICS summit and added that Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi had traveled to China to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization ministerial meeting for continued consultations.

On reports that China or Norway may act as new intermediaries in nuclear negotiations, Baghaei said such rumors were “just speculation and cannot be confirmed.”

Diplomacy still an option, but not at any cost

When asked about Iran’s conditions for returning to talks, Baghaei said, “We are serious about diplomacy and have entered negotiations with good faith. However, before the sixth round of talks, the Zionist regime, in coordination with the United States, carried out a military aggression against Iran.”

He emphasized that Iran would not re-enter negotiations “until there is confidence in the effectiveness of diplomacy.”

“Diplomacy is a tool and an opportunity,” he said. “We are not allowed to deprive ourselves of this tool to explain Iran’s position and defend our national interests. Just as the armed forces are fulfilling their duty to defend the country, the diplomatic apparatus must do the same through diplomacy.”

Damage to Fordow still under review

Baghaei said that assessments of damage to Iran’s Fordow nuclear facility, targeted by US bombs just before the ceasefire with Israel last month, are still ongoing due to the "scale and type of the strikes."

He also responded to a recent joint statement by the UK, France, and Germany condemning Iran's retaliatory strike on the Al-Udeid air base in Qatar.

“It is the height of hypocrisy for the three European countries to justify the aggression of the Zionist regime and question Iran’s legitimate defensive response,” he said. “These statements are baseless and not worth responding to.”

The members of the Society of Seminary Teachers of Qom, many of whom are senior religious scholars in Iran’s influential Shi’ite seminaries, said they were endorsing a fatwa which declared those who threaten religious authority figures – including the Supreme Leader – fall into the category of mohareb and must face the corresponding religious and legal consequences.

The clerics did not cite a specific decree, referring only to a “sensitive, historic, and courageous fatwa” by senior religious authorities in Qom and Najaf. Two recent fatwas by Grand Ayatollah Hossein Nouri Hamedani and Nasser Makarem Shirazi align with this description. The fatwas were issued in response to remarks by Israeli officials about assassinating Ali Khamenei.

“The Supreme Leadership and the institution of religious authority are symbols of the dignity of the Islamic Ummah,” the clerics said in the statement published by the IRGC-affiliated Fars News Agency. “Threats against them are threats against the foundations of Islam itself.”

“This fatwa is necessary and timely,” the Qom-based clerics wrote. “Defense of religious leadership is a duty for all Muslims.”

The signatories include prominent figures such as Ahmad Khatami and Alireza Arafi, both members of Iran’s Guardian Council, as well as senior clerics from the Qom seminary, many of whom hold official or semi-official posts in Iran’s establishment.

Iran has a history of issuing religious rulings with international consequences, most notably the 1989 fatwa by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini calling for the killing of British author Salman Rushdie. That fatwa remained in place for decades and was widely cited after a 2022 knife attack on Rushdie in New York.

Grossi in crosshairs

In their joint statement, the clerics called for the prosecution of several international figures, including US President Donald Trump, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Director General Rafael Grossi, accusing them of being “war criminals” complicit in attacks on Iranian leadership and infrastructure.

“We demand that international courts try and punish Grossi, Trump, Netanyahu, and all those who have betrayed humanity,” the clerics said.

The call for prosecuting Grossi comes amid growing hostility between Tehran and the UN nuclear watchdog following the recent Iran-Israel war.

Iranian authorities have accused Grossi and the IAEA of facilitating attacks on Iranian nuclear sites through what they call “deceptive inspections” and “intelligence sharing” with hostile governments.

“The IAEA has acted not as a neutral body but as a tool of Western espionage,” said cleric-turned-lawmaker Mahmoud Nabavian last week, alleging that inspectors had smuggled surveillance equipment into nuclear facilities. “They are spies disguised as inspectors, and Mr. Grossi is fully complicit.”

On Wednesday, Ali Mozaffari, deputy head of Iran’s judiciary, said Iran was considering trying Grossi in absentia for allegedly enabling Israeli strikes on Iranian nuclear facilities. Mozaffari said the judiciary was compiling evidence of “foreign aggression” and would pursue legal remedies.

Hardline media outlets, including Kayhan newspaper — closely aligned with Khamenei — have called for Grossi’s arrest and even his execution should he travel to Iran.

Western governments have condemned the threats against Grossi. Britain, France, and Germany released a joint statement last month expressing “full support for the independence and impartiality of the IAEA” and warning Tehran against politicizing the agency’s work.

Mehdi Mohammadi, a strategic adviser to Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf, posted the image in an Instagram story on Saturday.

The image showed a map of Israel with two mushroom clouds positioned over its territory—an iconography widely recognized as symbolizing atomic blasts.

A few hours later, Mohammadi posted a second Instagram story seeking to clarify his position.

“Hello friends,” he wrote. “That story was posted by the admin of my page and was deleted a few minutes later. I personally do not believe that developing nuclear weapons would enhance Iran’s deterrence. At the very least, it’s an extremely complex issue."

"Just as possessing nuclear weapons hasn’t prevented Israel from receiving heavy blows, or enabled Ukraine to strike Russia decisively, the military utility of nuclear arms is far more limited than most people imagine,” he added.

Iran continues to deny any ambition to acquire nuclear weapons, dismissing international concerns as politically driven.

Last month, American airstrikes targeted major Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan. The attacks came after days of Israeli campaign against Iran where the Jewish State used cruise missiles and deep-penetration bombs to damage infrastructure and affiliated military units.

In October, a group of lawmakers called on Iran's Supreme National Security Council to review the country's defense doctrine and consider adopting nuclear weapons.

"Why is it that every time these inspectors enter our nuclear facilities, and we conduct body checks, we find microchips in their shoes?" the deputy chairman of the parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee said.

"It is a fact, not a slogan, that these inspectors are spies," Mahmoud Nabavian said in remarks published by Fars News Agency.

He accused the UN nuclear watchdog of repeatedly passing classified information to foreign governments. "How did Iran’s nuclear installations, such as those in Natanz, become known to the outside world?"

“They know because they are told—by their satellites, their spies, and the agency itself,” he added.

Nabavian said IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi had directly shared Iranian data with Western states. "Even now, they themselves admit all our main statistics and information are given to them by Mr. Grossi.”

Iran’s parliament in late June approved a bill to suspend the country’s cooperation with the IAEA, less than a day into a ceasefire with Israel following 12 days of deadly war.

Parliament members also criticized the IAEA and Grossi, accusing the agency of providing “false reports, politically biased behavior, and facilitating espionage against Iran’s nuclear infrastructure.”

The hardliners and Kayhan newspaper, overseen by Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, recently called for the arrest and execution of Grossi if he visited Tehran.