Mehdi’s EXCLUSIVE interview with Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesman On The War

The US-Israeli illegal war on Iran is about to enter its fifth week. Iran is showing no signs of backing down or rolling over, while the US, the Trump administration, seems to be prepping for a ground invasion. Joining me now, as you can see here, is Iran's spokesperson, its Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson, Dr. Ismail Barghai, to talk about the war, nuclear negotiations, human rights abuses and more.

Dr. Barghai, thank you for joining me from Tehran on Zotero today.

Thank you.

Thank you for having me.

We'll talk about what actually happened in the nuclear negotiations. I know you were involved in last month between the US and Iran. We'll talk about whether there's any prospects for renewed diplomacy between the two countries. But I have to start first with the state of this war right now between the US-Israel on one side, Iran on the other.

In your view, is Iran winning this war, losing this war in a tie? And if you say you're winning, how does Iran define winning, define victory against the US?

I think we have already won this brutal war because, literally speaking, we have been in confrontation. To say it otherwise, the United States has been at war with Iran from 1979, when they opposed Iranian revolution that was aimed at overthrowing the dictatorship. For the past 47 years, they tried everything, assassination, crippling sanctions, as they call it. And as you know, during the last months of Iran-Iraq war, they also intervened militarily. So this is another phase in their animosity toward Iranians.

And it is mostly based on their miscalculation. And this time, everyone understands this is a war of Israel. They were dragged into this war, again, because of their miscalculation. I think the Iranians showed that they are determined,

they are resolute in defending their homeland, because they understand that this is an unjust war of aggression imposed on Iranians. So the fact that for the past three, 27 days, 28 days, we have been resilient. We have defended against two nuclear armed regime. They are technologically superior.

They are very sophisticated. But we have learned how to live, survive and thrive under these critical situations.

We hear a lot of experts saying that even if the US were to stop the war tomorrow, stop the bombing, Iran would not stop and has no interest in stopping this war until it establishes or reestablishes deterrence, until it has a guarantee that it won't be attacked again in the future.

Is that a fair description of the Iranian government's position? I think this is based on the past experiences we have had. Just look, for the past nine months, we have been attacked twice while we were in the middle of negotiations. They attacked us in 13 June while we were supposed to meet on 15 June. And for 12 days we had to fight back. And then after a few months they said, let's talk again.

We engaged in these negotiations, but they replicated the same pattern on 28 February. They launched their aggression while we were supposed to meet on Monday in Vienna.

Talk about that happening again.

Again, that's the point. We have to make sure that this cycle of war, nation, ceasefire and then repeating the same happen again.

But what does that look like? What does the security guarantee for Iran look like if that's what you want?

I think I think the experience has shown that there is no security guarantee. We have to guarantee our security. We use all this, all the cities we have in order to make sure that Israel and the United States will not attack Iran again.

President Trump says he has completely decimated and beaten Iran economically and militarily. He says he has blown Iran off the map, which is obviously not true. It's his typical hyperbole. But the US and Israel have degraded your military severely. They've destroyed huge parts of your infrastructure, set Iran back years, if not decades. You're not denying that, are you?

It reminds me of the first days of Saddam's decision of Iran. The first minutes they attacked Iran, they claimed that they had broken the bones of Iranians. that they broken the bones of Iranian. It long years, we fought back. And please remember, those days, we were in the first days of the revolution. And the previous system had collapsed.

And we had to fight with minimum capacity and capability. Today, Iran is a mature state based on the weak people. For 47, we have learned how to subdue our enemies. This is not a place that we are fighting with the United States and Israel. So we have gone through these experiences and we know how to fight back and how to survive this crisis.

Just hours before we started this interview, Donald Trump posted on his Truth Social website that Iranian negotiators, he called you strange and he said you are begging for a deal with the US. Is he telling the truth?

Tell me how you can really believe this diplomacy. Basically, is there any diplomacy in this administration? They betrayed diplomacy

two times for the past nine months. So I think it would be insane for anyone to take what they say, Kremlin Fasci as believable. We cannot simply ignore the experiences we had the past nine months

of negotiations with the United States. And again, please, I should remind your audience that we had a deal with the United States in 2015. But three years later, they withdrew from the deal unilaterally for no reason. And then we tried so many times to reintegrate that deal every time they move the goal. They be paid diplomacy. So that's their fault.

This is not Iran's fault.

So let me ask you about the nuclear negotiations. You've mentioned it a few times. How close were you? How close was Iran to a nuclear deal, a new nuclear deal with the US in Geneva on the eve of this war?

The Omani foreign minister said a deal was, quote, within reach, that there was an agreement on big issues like zero stockpiling and enrichment. But the IAEA chief, Rafael Grossi, has said there was a discussion, yes, but, quote, no agreement at that point.

What's the Iranian position on what happened at Geneva on the eve of this war?

I refer you to what was said by Omani mediator. I think he was trusted by both Iran and the United States. Rappel-Grossi was not part of that. Everyone knows that Rappel-Grossi has always been simply on the side of the spoilers, unfortunately. But what Mr. Ghossaini said was correct in saying that the deal was within reach. He characterized the negotiations as significantly promising.

And everyone, I mean, others also, the UK authorities that were involved in this process, not only in this process, but they were aware of the negotiations. He also said that the flexibility shown by Iran was unprecedented. So everyone knows that.

Just to be clear, Dr. Bavai, just to be clear for our viewers who are not all nuclear experts, you say Iran was being flexible. Just give me the three top bullet points of what you had been flexible on at Geneva. What did you agree to with the Omanis?

First, they have been telling the world for the past four decades that Iran is at the verge of developing nuclear weapons. That's a big lie because our nuclear program has been safeguarded. We had the most sophisticated inspection regime on our nuclear program, you cannot find a single paragraph single report from the IAEA indicating that Iran nuclear program is deviating to weaponization. Secondly, their concern was about Iran's highly enriched uranium.

We agreed to dilute them. Thirdly, they were concerned about the accumulation of highly enriched uranium. We said that we would enrich uranium only in accordance with our needs. It would mean that there would be no accumulation of highly enriched uranium. So if their consent truly about highly uranium could be the necessary of any nuclear weapon, that was simply moved.

Just to be clear, you agreed to no stockpiling. I think the phrase was of highly enriched uranium. Had you agreed to no enrichmentpiling. I think the Omani phrase was of highly enriched. Had you agreed to no enrichment because that was being one of the US demands at one point,

zero enrichment? Enrichment is part of every country's right on their NPT. Iran has been part of NPT from 1970. Iran initiated the Middle East Free From Nuclear Weapon as of 1974. So if Iran is part of NPT, if Iran is going to remain in that treaty, it should be able to benefit from the prerogatives. According to Article 4 of the NPT, Iran has a right to have nuclear capacity for peaceful

purposes.

So what I'm hearing is that you hadn't agreed to the US demand, many would say excessive, non-NPT demand, that Iran should do zero enrichment, but you had agreed to no highly enriched uranium in Iran. That's what you're saying you were flexible on. The IAEA...

The IAEA... The IAEA...

The IAEA... I'm sorry. Their main concern, as they said... Yes. And we do not think that that's really legitimate consent, but their alleged consent was about Iran's keeping highly in Iran. We can do that by the use and about Iran capacity. We said we would do it in accordance with our needs. Our needs means three.

So let's talk about let's talk about your needs. Dr. Let's talk about your needs. The IAEA estimated last year that you had a 400 kilogram stockpile of 60% enriched uranium, which is just a step away, as you know, from 90% weapons grade enrichment and enough for 10 nuclear warheads, the IAEA said. Your critics often ask, why have 400 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium?

If you weren't planning on building nukes, what other reason would there be to enrich so high to 60 percent? What do you say to them?

OK, this is another misrepresentation of facts. The fact that 400 kilograms of highly enriched uranium doesn't mean that we have nuclear weapon. OK, I didn't say that. I didn't say that. Second, why did we do that? Because in 2015, we had a deal and Iran agreed to have just 3.67% enriched uranium, not above that. But in 2018, the United States withdrew from the deal. For one long year, we just waited for Europeans to compensate for the United States withdrawal. After

one year, we decided to scale back our commitments, because we couldn't stay in a deal one sidedly. So the reason why we increased uranium to that level simply was to reciprocate the United States withdrawal from it. We never had any intention to make nuclear weapons. We have made it clear and-

It was a negotiating tactic, a bargaining chip.

You can put it that way.

In a political climate this turbulent, the stories that never make it to the front page are the ones we need the most. Ground News is an independent app and website that scans 50,000 plus sources to highlight the stories you wouldn't see otherwise. The unique Blindspot feature analyses your news preferences and picks out low-coverage stories.

Take this story about Trump's visa rules restricting international teacher hiring in rural high-poverty schools. Despite the story highlighting real-life impacts of Trump's immigration policy, only 57 sources have published articles on it. With just 10% of the sources leaning right, most people on the other side of the political spectrum will never hear about it.

Ground News doesn't just highlight low-coverage stories, it helps you determine which sources are the best. For example, take this article from the Associated Press. Ground News analyses it as independent media with very high factuality. Don't let outsiders determine which stories are important to you. Subscribe to Ground News at ground.news forward slash Zoteo to get 40 percent off the unlimited Access Vantage subscription.

Let me ask you this. There has been reporting that Iran and Gulf countries even consider Steve Whitcoff and Jared Kushner, the lead US negotiators, to be, quote, Israeli assets. That's what The Guardian wrote. And that you, Iran, would now prefer to negotiate with Vice President J.D.

Vance going forward.

Is that the case?

We regard the United States as a state. So regardless of who...

Sorry, Dr. Begay, the Internet is not great right now from Tehran to the US. Could you start that answer again?

The point is that we are negotiating with the United States as a sovereign nation. So regardless of who is representing the United States, the outcome was catastrophic because the United States could not really comply with their obligation in the first place. And secondly, they didn't negotiate it in good faith. And I think that's very important because negotiation in good faith is the basic principle

of international law, international diplomacy.

With respect, you didn't answer my question. Going forward, would you prefer to negotiate with the vice president over Kushner and Whitcoff?

I can tell you that the Iranians didn't have a good experience with those invoiced. I think it's a short thing. The Iranians cannot trust those who agreed to have another round of negotiations on Monday and then just two days before that, they launched an aggressive war against Iran.

The late Ayatollah Khamenei, your former supreme leader, had a fatwa, a religious ruling, banning nuclear weapons in the early 2000s. Iran agreed in the 2015 JCPOA, the nuclear deal with President Obama, that it would never get nuclear weapons.

The US intelligence community confirmed last year that Iran is not get nuclear weapons. The US intelligence community confirmed last year that Iran is not seeking nuclear weapons. I wonder, is all of that out of the window now? Is Iran now still willing to say, we will never get nukes? Or has this war changed everything? Are nukes now on the table, a la North Korea?

I can tell you, this shows that we are a nation of principle. We were sanctions, we were attacked, our scientists were assassinated, our people were assassinated. But you cannot find any statement from our leaders saying that we would go for nuclear weapon. That means that we are a nation of principle. And it also shows that the Americans and Israeli were not really concerned about Iran's nuclear weapon. That was simply an excuse.

But that was the past. I'm asking about the future. Has that changed now?

Otherwise, they would not have assassinated those who denounce nuclear weapon. About the future, I cannot judge about the future. But one thing is sure is that again, Iran remains a nation of principle.

If Iran had nuclear weapons, you wouldn't have been attacked, many say.

That's the judgment of many. But as I said, even during war with Saddam Hussein, we were gassed. Saddam Hussein used chemical weapons generously given to him by Germany and other Western countries, but we never were allowed to use the same method of warfare. WMD is prohibited under our Islamic precepts and under our national values.

Dr. Mugai, the US reportedly sent a 15-point peace plan to Iran via Pakistan, calling for limits on your ballistic missile programme and end to your support for Hamas and Hezbollah and the Houthis, removal of all enrichment material. To be clear, has Iran definitively rejected that 15-point plan?

I'm not going to express any official on that. One thing I can tell you is that, yes, we have received through mediators certain suggestions from the United States. Those suggestions are extremely maximalist and unreasonable. And I think I should stop at this. You see, talking about those things which are part of inherent right of Iranians is not a sign of good faith or seriousness in any diplomacy.

They have already tried that.

You're describing American proposals as maximalist and unreasonable. Some would say yours are also maximalist and unreasonable. Some would say yours are also maximalist and unreasonable. Iran has talked about well, Iran has talked about American forces withdrawing from the entire Middle East, which let's be honest, is not going to happen. There's reporting that Iran now plans to charge fees on ships that go through the Strait of Hormuz once it's reopened.

None of that is realistic or reasonable, is it? Have you received any of these points you refer to as official position of Iran?

So they're not the positions of Iran, they're what's being reported by people in your government.

There have been many stipulations, many reports about different things. But one thing is clear. We have to make sure that the United States and Israel would not be in a position to attack Iran again.

How do you do that?

I asked you at the start of the interview.

I don't understand how you do that.

We have to do it in practice. We have to make sure that the territory of our Arab brothers and sisters would not be abused to attack another country in the region. You know what happened, Mahdi. On 10th of Ramazan, the countries, the territories of Muslims and Arab countries in the region were abused by the United States and Israel

to attack another Muslim nation. And I think that's a shame.

Do you worry that your neighbors, the Gulf neighbors who you've bombed, and the former ICC chief prosecutor says your attacks, the Gulf neighbours, who you've bombed and the former ICC chief prosecutor says your attacks on the Gulf are illegal also, they are now, even if the war ends tomorrow, surely you've wrecked your relations pretty much forever with your Arab neighbours.

First, we didn't bomb them, we didn't attack them, We just defended ourselves against sources of aggression. Unfortunately, they allow United States and Israel to use their territories, their military bases, their assets, to conduct their military aggression against Iran. This is both illegal and immoral. We attach high importance to our relations

with every country in the Persian Gulf region.

And we are determined to continue good relations. importance to our relations with every country in the Persian Gulf region.

And we are determined to continue good relations.

Do you...

But what else should we do? Beat their attack?

Do you worry that the Saudis and the Emiratis are going to join the war against...

United States are going to join the war against Iran.

Do you worry that the Saudis and the Emiratis are going to join the war against you? The Emiratis have been making very hawkish noises. The New York Times is reporting that MBS, the crown prince of Saudi Arabia, is urging Trump to carry on attacking you. Do you worry that they're going to join the war against you next?

Whatever is said in the Western newspaper, we regard them as a falsehood. So we do not regard them as plausible because we know that we feel no animosity toward any Arab Muslim country in the region.

I mean, they might feel differently. Iranian bombs are dropping on their countries. They might feel differently.

Please, Iranian bombs are dropped on Arab and Muslim countries. Iranian missiles are launched against those military bases and assets that are being used by Americans and Israelis against Iran. Can you imagine that Muslim countries, Arab countries are taking side with Israel, a genocidal regime that has already killed 70,000 innocent Palestinians against another nation in the region? Palestinians against another nation in the region, they have to be very careful. They have to understand that the outcome of this war could be the hegemony of a genocidal

regime over the region. So for Iran, instead of standing against Iran, Iran is fighting against the United States and Israel. And I think you must be appreciated because we are sacrificing not only for Iran, but also for the whole region, for the security of the region.

Let's talk about Iran's leadership. How do we know the new supreme leader of Iran, Mujtaba Khamenei, is even alive or in good health. We've not seen him in public since he was appointed. No videos, no audio.

He had a very important message on the eve of Nowruz. So Alhamdulillah, he's alive And he is now the commander of armed forces and our Supreme leader.

Why can't he come on TV like you have come on today?

Okay, you can understand this, the worst situation, the threats. So I think we have every reason to be very careful because you see, he's not injured or sick because that's what also he is fine. He's fine.

This is not a conventional classical warfare. This is a company combination of terrorism and act of aggression. And I think you cannot find a similar case in the history that the leaders of the country, the political leaders, diplomats even, can kill or threaten by their own. So this is a nasty war imposed on Iranians and every Iranian take maximum

power because of this situation. That's undeniable what you're saying about the assassinations. I'm not disputing that. You had massive protests in Iran back in January, demanding a change of government, and for many, an end to the Islamic Republic's theocratic model of government in particular. Why does your government refuse to listen

to the demands of the people? Why replace one unelected supreme leader, who ruled for 40 years, nearly 40 years, with another unelected Supreme Leader who the Iranian people didn't choose, had no say over. How is your country not a dictatorship?

This is not true. He is not an unelected leader. He was elected by the Assembly of Experts. And the Assembly of Experts are being elected by polls, by the people. And this assembly of experts, as the authority, has the right to monitor the performance of the supreme leader. So he is appointed by the assembly of experts. You refer to the protests, yes, we had these protests protest mainly because of the economic hardship, because of the sanctions. And then after a few days, after 10 days, it was turned violent. I refer you to Western media that are now starting to recognize the facts that all this violence was propagated, was even orchestrated by the United

States and Israel as part of their campaign to defame Iran and to destabilize the system.

Well let's talk about that. You're saying two things at once and I think two things can be true at once. It is undeniable that the Israelis were trying to incite protests inside of Iran. The Financial Times has reported on that. The Israelis themselves have said that. So I'm not disputing that outside powers were

trying to foment unrest and incite protests. But you've also admitted that these protests were legitimate demands against economic problems. Your president said in December these were legitimate demands. And then you crack down on these protesters.

Some people say 30 to 40 thousand people were killed. That's seen as the higher end.

I think your own government has admitted that thousands died.

according to you?

Some some put it 70 thousand to match it with the number of Palestinians killed in genocide.

Put aside what your critics say. I'm asking what you think. How many people were killed?

3,170 persons were killed. And I should say that every single life matters for us. 2,400 of them were regarded as martyrs because they were either police officers or the bystanders. But I should believe.

Well, hold on.

Hold on.

Your government figures suggest, I think it's 3,117 is what the Iranian government put out, 200 security forces. So who killed all of the other civilians?

As I said, many of them were killed by the government infiltrated inside the protesters.

How many were killed by your government?

I don't have the figure.

It's a pretty big issue for Iran. It's been the biggest.

Yes, it is.

So how can you not know how many people your government, your security forces killed?

I don't have information, but for sure the security persons, the security authorities are aware of that and it is being investigated. But one thing is sure, that the protest, which was peaceful for economic problems, were turned violent because of the American and Israeli. And this is what they confess to that.

So let me ask you this, when leading human rights groups like Amnesty International accuse your government of quote, massacring protesters, when they say they have reviewed, and I'm quoting here, verified videos and eyewitness accounts of quote security forces positioned on the streets

and on the rooftops of buildings, including houses, mosques and police stations, repeatedly firing, quote, rifles and shotguns loaded with metal pellets at protesters frequently targeting their heads and torsos. When amnesty, no friend of the US or Israeli governments, when amnesty says that, Dr. Baghaie, why should we believe your government and not amnesty?

Why should we believe amnesty and not Iran?

Because they've documented the evidence. You're saying you don't even have the numbers. They've provided evidence, verified videos and eyewitness accounts.

Yeah, yeah. You can simply see many of those so-called evidence and videos being provided to them by Israel and United States sources.

Look, it's not. It's not. They haven't been them by Israel and United States sources.

It's not, it's not. They haven't been provided by Israel. Israel in fact, criticizes amnesty the same way you do. I've interviewed Israeli officials and they accuse amnesty of fake evidence. You sound, I'm sorry to say,

like an Israeli official denying what happened in Gaza. These are eyewitness accounts, doctors accounts, videos.

You compare Iran's peaceful threat to Gaza?

Come on. No, I'm comparing your response denying a human rights group I'm not quoting the US or Israeli governments. I agree with you. The US and Israeli governments are not reliable when it comes to Iran I'm quoting an independent human rights group

I'm I'm not sure they are independent. Otherwise, they would have they would have come and Tell the stories of many innocent Iranians that have been killed during the past 27 days. They didn't. Okay. So what I'm saying that, in all honesty, I said the government, the president office

published the names of those who were killed during this protest. And we were transparent to say that they were killed by whom? We said that 2,400 of them were regarded as martyrs because they were killed either by the government, they were either the police officers or the innocent bystanders, many of them.

And you can say that, yes, 600 of them were either the infiltrators or those gunmen. But what about the eyewitness accounts

of people being brought into hospitals, heads and faces shot full of pellets by Iranian security forces? Human Rights Watch have documented that. Amnesty International have documented that. Multiple media outlets.

You're saying all these eyewitnesses are lying. It's all fake.

I'm not saying all of them are lies. I have to see them. And I'm sure that our authorities are taking care of every report that has been produced implicating our security forces.

Well you could give me the numbers earlier, so I'm not sure. I'm not sure it has been that full an investigation. Before we run out of time, let me ask you about another important issue.

I'm the spokesman of Ministry of Foreign Affairs. That I do not know exactly what, I told you the numbers, that I do not know exactly the number of those people who have been killed by others doesn't mean that we don't have a religion. You have to talk to the spokesperson of the Ministry of Interior. OK.

The security people. Well, let me ask you about something a foreign ministry spokesman should know about another human rights claim. You have the US bombing a girls school, Israel bombing residential buildings and power plants in Iran. Those are war crimes, undeniably.

We have said so at Zeteo. What the US and Israel is doing in Iran are war crimes. But Iran is also using cluster munitions against Israel, which are indiscriminate. They cause a lot of civilian casualties. And again, Amnesty International, human rights group, has previously called the use of such munitions

a flagrant violation of international humanitarian law. Dr. Bagaie, how can you condemn the US and Israel for breaking international law if you're doing it too?

How many people have been killed by those so-called cluster ammunitions?

Why are they so-called?

Because I cannot confirm that.

Well you're denying the use of cluster munitions. But in any case... We've seen evidence of.

You see...

And you asked me a question, by the way, three Palestinian women in the occupied West Bank were killed last week by a direct hit from what the Israeli military say was an Iranian cluster munition missile.

They are saying that.

So who killed the three Palestinian women? I mean, the Palestinian, the Palestinian Red Crescent is saying that that is a Palestinian group, not an Israeli group.

But I can tell you that Israelis are professional lawyers. What about the Palestinian Red Crescent?

What about the Palestinian Red Crescent, which says the three women were killed by fragmentation of an Iranian missile?

We have to investigate that. OK, but one thing is for sure. Only in one single act of war crime, as you put it correctly, 175 innocent kids and teachers were killed. But this was not a single accident. They have been attacking many residential areas.

Even our Red Crescent Society was targeted by the United States and Israel. So this is a pattern of their war tactics, their war strategy.

So you cannot compare... I'm not disputing that. I was asking about your tactics. Why use cluster munitions if you are, as you said earlier in the interview, a country of principles? Those are banned under customary international law, under 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions. I know you

haven't signed them, but that has the weight of international law. We are 100% compliant with our obligations under international law.

Last question I have to ask you. There's chatter here in DC that we could see a ground invasion of Iran, whether it's Karg Island, whether it's Iran proper, the mainland, as early as this weekend maybe. We know Donald Trump likes to do things at weekends.

Are you prepared for that? What will the Iranian response be to a ground invasion by the most powerful armed forces in the history of the world?

You see, this is our homeland. And we have to stay strong and we have to fight back. I'm sure that our armed forces are prepared for every scenario. Do we have any other choice other than fighting back the

invaders? This is an arms war and I'm sure our people are determined and united to fight against any such scenario.

What is your message to Donald Trump today?

I do not have any message to the American authorities, but to American people, I think this is a war of whims. This is not the war of American people against Iranian nation. This is a war that the United States is dragged into by Israel. This is a war that is imposed on the region. Iran has nothing to do with the consequences.

The calamity that this war has brought upon the region and on world economy must be, the United States must have, must be hold accountable for all the consequences. So this is a war of choice by the United States against a civilizational state, against a civilization that was in diplomatic process with the United States against a civilizational state, against a civilizational nation that was in diplomatic process with the United States to resolve their differences.

Dr. Ismail Barghai from the Iranian Foreign Ministry, we appreciate you taking my questions in the middle of a war.

Thank you for your time.

Thank you. I appreciate it.

Did you like this video? Did you like this video? Don't forget to subscribe to this YouTube channel and turn on notifications for exclusive like this.