Tehran has never relied on Russia for its military power, a former chief-commander of Iran's Revolutionary Guards said, adding that Moscow now depends on Iranian missiles and drones, not the other way around.
“Iran received assistance from Libya and North Korea in the field of missile technology, but not from the Russians,” Mohammad-Ali Jafari said in an online interview posted on YouTube on Saturday.
During the early post-revolutionary years, he added, Iran was permitted to reverse-engineer certain systems and exchange limited technical information with Tripoli and Pyongyang.
“The Russians offered no real help,” he said. “On the contrary, they are now the ones who need our missiles and drones.”
Iranian-designed drones have been key to Russia's war effort against Ukraine, even though Tehran denies providing Moscow with such weapons.
However, Moscow provided little, if any, support during Iran's brief summer war with Israel.
The two countries have signed a long-term security framework, but Russia’s restraint underscores the limits of its backing.
Earlier this month, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said his country was "engaged in supplying the equipment that the Islamic Republic of Iran needs" even after UN sanctions were reimposed last month.
‘Russia now seeking Iranian technology’
Iran has "never relied on Russia for our [military] capabilities, they are the ones who need our missiles and drones," Jafari said in his online interview, adding that Moscow’s reliance on Iranian systems underscores how the balance of capability has shifted.
Jafari dismissed the notion that Moscow’s technology exceeds Tehran’s, arguing that Iran’s advancements in precision and guidance systems outpace those of Russia.
“It’s unlikely that the Russians possess the pinpoint accuracy our missiles have. In terms of precision and technology, we are different from them,” he said.
Iran’s strength lies in domestically developed systems, the former IRGC chief said, describing the country’s missile and drone capabilities as products of “decades of indigenous effort.”
“Foreign input had been useful in the early stages but our engineers quickly surpassed the models we studied.”
Iran, Jafari said, had been preparing for potential conflict with Israel since the 1990s, which guided the decision to focus on missile and drone forces over fighter jets.
“At that time, it was decided that the army’s air force would concentrate on aircraft and defense, while the IRGC would handle the aerospace, missile, and drone sectors.”
The decision, he noted, stemmed from both cost and survivability concerns, given the technological gap with Western powers.
Earlier this month, leaked Russian defense documents indicated Iran had signed a €6 billion deal to buy 48 Su-35 fighter jets from Moscow, with deliveries expected between 2026 and 2028.
Last month, an Iranian lawmaker said Russian MiG-29 fighter jets had arrived in Iran as part of a short-term plan to bolster its air force, with more advanced Sukhoi Su-35 aircraft to follow gradually.
Iran has long sought to modernize its aging air force, which relies heavily on US-made jets purchased before the 1979 revolution and a small number of Russian and locally upgraded aircraft.
Western analysts say Iran’s request for 50 aircraft remains only partly fulfilled, with deliveries slowed by Russia’s own needs in Ukraine.
Tehran also faces vulnerability in air defenses after Israeli strikes earlier this year destroyed its last Russian-provided S-300 systems. Iran had acquired the four S-300 battalions from Russia in 2016.
Iran’s current level of preparedness surpasses that seen before the 12-day war, Araghchi said in an interview published on Friday with US-based journalist Dariush Sajjadi.
“Being ready does not mean expecting war,” he said. “If you are ready to fight, no one dares to attack. I am confident the previous experience will not be repeated, and any mistake will meet the same response.”
The United States held five rounds of talks with Tehran earlier this year over its disputed nuclear program, under a 60-day ultimatum set by President Donald Trump.
When no deal was reached by the 61st day, June 13, Israel launched a surprise military campaign, culminating in US strikes on June 22 targeting key nuclear sites in Esfahan, Natanz, and Fordow.
While the 12-day war ended on June 24 following a US-brokered truce, global concerns over Tehran’s nuclear program grew even more complicated as 400 kilograms of Iran’s highly enriched uranium remains missing.
Tehran says the material was buried under rubble from US and Israeli airstrikes and is inaccessible but has yet to allow international inspectors access to the damaged facilities.
No nuclear weapon
Araghchi dismissed international concerns about Iran's possible pursuit of a nuclear weapon, saying the country's nuclear program is “completely peaceful and legally grounded,” citing a religious decree forbidding nuclear weapons.
“Our nuclear doctrine does not include nuclear arms,” he said. “We pursue enrichment because it is our right, not because we seek a bomb. Our atomic bomb is the power to say no.”
While Iran denies seeking a nuclear weapon, the UN's nuclear watchdog argues that enrichment to high levels of purity lacks any civilian justification.
In 2018, President Trump withdrew the United States from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (JCPOA), calling it flawed and too lenient. He then launched a maximum pressure campaign, reimposing harsh sanctions to cripple Iran’s economy and force broader concessions on its nuclear and regional activities. After his reelection, Trump intensified the same strategy.
Relations with the United States
On ties with Washington, Araghchi said the main obstacle lies in what he called America’s “hegemonic character.”
“As long as the United States behaves with domination and Iran refuses to submit, this problem will persist,” he said. “But it can be managed—we do not have to pay every price.”
He cited repeated failed negotiations as evidence of mistrust. “We negotiated, reached agreements, and fulfilled them, yet each time the US broke its word,” he said.
"In New York (during the UN General Assembly in September), there was an opportunity for talks, but they made completely unreasonable and illogical demands — for instance, that we hand over all our enriched material to them in exchange for a six-month extension of the snapback. What sane person would accept that? It has nothing to do with Iran at all."
Araghchi said "there is no basis for trust, though diplomacy is never abandoned. If the US is ready to talk, with honesty and mutual respect, Iran is prepared for a rational and balanced agreement.”
Iran will not yield its rights or tolerate coercion but remains open to any reasonable and fair solution that preserves national dignity, he concluded.
The June conflict was capped off on June 22 with US strikes on major nuclear sites, marking the superpower's first direct assault on Iranian territory after decades of proxy conflicts.
Tehran's lack of any meaningful retaliation, Yaphe said, laid bare how exposed 86-year-old Supreme Leader Khamenei was and how a security apparatus he had built up for decades had failed to perform.
"It’s very hard to see how Iran regains legitimacy,” said Yaphe, who worked as a Middle East analyst for the State Department for 15 years.
“These are the people who crafted the narratives of the ‘resistance economy’ and other doctrines supporting Khamenei’s agenda,” he added. “That generation is retiring, dying off, or leaving leadership roles, with no coherent transition plan for what comes next.”
Iran’s central challenge, he said, is generational. The revolutionary cadre from the 1979 Revolution and the Iran-Iraq War built key institutions such as the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the Basij domestic militia and economic conglomerates which dominate large sectors of the economy.
Memory of pre-1979 grievances such rural inequality under the Shah as well as torture and killings by his security agencies, Yaphe says, lingers strongly for the superannuated ruling cadres.
These authorities remain committed to anti-Western confrontation and nuclear advancement, viewing compromise as weakness, according to Yaphe.
“The government in Iran has chosen to die on a particular hill, and they’re going to die there slowly, in their sleep,” he said. “It’s going to be a very slow, mundane transition, the outcome is likely gradual change rather than abrupt upheaval.”
Even the most apparently reactionary institutions like the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps could theoretically play a role in a transition.
"In the event of a change in power, there’s no future for the Guards as they exist today,” he said. “Internally, the IRGC could pursue a coup or maintain clerical oversight to preserve influence—they’ll have to weigh costs and benefits.”
Across the region, Yaphe said Islamist movements are declining, citing sidelined groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and weakened Iranian proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah.
‘Next move happens soon’
Donald Trump’s maximum pressure campaign and the 2020 US assassination of senior IRGC commander Qasem Soleimani were major turning points, Yaphe said.
“Actions under Trump advanced these trends. The Soleimani strike disproved fears of escalation, direct measures disrupted Iran’s comfort with covert operations dating back to its 1982 interventions in Lebanon," he said, referring to the IRGC's founding of its powerful Lebanese affiliate Hezbollah.
“Iran prefers operating in the shadows,” Yaphe added. “Israel and the US responded forcefully, degrading proxies - probably the most effective approach.”
He criticized Washington’s traditional Iran policy as overly partisan: negotiation-driven on the left, confrontational on the right, but often lacking depth.
The analyst contrasted this with Trump’s approach, which, he said, prioritized results over ideology.
“President Trump has specified acceptable terms,” Yaphe said. “Tehran, still trapped in 1979-era thinking, doesn’t grasp the shift toward pragmatic power dynamics. They don’t seem to understand that the West will act.”
“In the next three to five years, something significant will happen in Iran,” Yaphe said. “Either way, it won’t remain the Islamic Republic we know today.”
Alcohol accounted for about five percent of all poisoning fatalities in the first five months of the current Iranian year, identifying illicitly produced drinks as the main source, said the Organization. It recorded 4,232 deaths from various types of poisoning during the period and noted a slight decline in alcohol-related fatalities compared with last year, when they made up six percent of the total.
Alcohol intoxication, according to hospital data, accounted for ten percent of poisoning-related admissions last year, falling to 8.5 percent in the first half of this year. Deputy Health Minister Alireza Raeisi said on October 11 that the actual number of alcohol poisoning cases was likely “ten times higher than those reaching emergency units.”
Alcohol ban and black market trade
The sale and consumption of alcohol have been banned in Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution, with production, purchase, or use punishable by imprisonment, flogging, or fines. Repeat offenders can face the death penalty.
Despite strict penalties, demand for alcohol has persisted, driving a widespread underground market. Bootleg drinks, often made with toxic industrial methanol, continue to claim lives each year across the country.
Public health experts warn that the recurring poisonings underscore a growing social divide between state restrictions and personal behavior. Many Iranians view the persistence of black-market alcohol as evidence of resistance to religious regulation over private life.
The deaths caused by bootleg alcohol, the Legal Medicine Organization said, remain preventable through public education, early medical response, and stronger oversight of illegal production and distribution networks.
Maleki said that airstrikes had harmed parts of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure but that “work is ongoing” and would not be halted. “Nuclear science has become part of the daily life of our people,” he said.
His comments followed remarks by IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi, who said earlier this week that Iran’s technical expertise had survived the 12-day war in June, when US and Israeli airstrikes caused severe damage to key nuclear sites in Isfahan, Natanz and Fordow. Grossi told Le Temps newspaper that Iran now holds enough enriched uranium for ten nuclear weapons if it chose to enrich further, but added there was no evidence Tehran seeks to build one.
He also said Iran had not withdrawn from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and that diplomacy should prevail to prevent renewed confrontation.
Maleki said Iran would continue its program “regardless of outside rhetoric” and that there was “no reason to abandon it.”
Renewed friction over IAEA oversight
The lawmaker’s remarks came amid rising tension between Tehran and the International Atomic Energy Agency after Iran, Russia and China urged an end to the agency’s monitoring and reporting tied to the 2015 nuclear deal, following the expiry of the UN resolution that endorsed it.
In a joint letter sent on Friday, the three countries told Grossi that Resolution 2231, which endorsed the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), formally expired on October 18. They asserted that with its termination, the IAEA’s reporting mandate under the resolution “has come to an end.”
Western governments reject that position, insisting that the agency’s verification work remains vital as long as Iran stays bound by the NPT and its safeguards obligations.
Grossi has said the IAEA continues to monitor developments and that cooperation between Iran and the agency is essential to avoid escalation.