Iran Determined to Continue Peaceful Nuclear Program

Iran's Foreign Minister has called an acceptable framework for negotiations one that recognizes Iran's rights to peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment.

News ID: 86982

Date: 08 December 2025 - 10:56

TEHRAN (Defapress) - In an interview with Kyodo News Agency, in response to the question, “How does Iran intend to address these concerns and restore confidence in its nuclear program?”, the Iranian Foreign Minister stated: It is the United States, the Europeans and others who must assure us that we can enjoy our right to peaceful use of nuclear technology without bombing and attack.

The Foreign Minister clarified: “So if they want us to return to diplomacy and cooperation with the Agency, it is they who must gain our trust.”

He also stated regarding the possibility of resuming negotiations with the United States: “This depends on the United States. If they change their approach and are ready for fair and balanced negotiations, that is, mutually beneficial negotiations, we are also ready.”

Araqchi considered an acceptable framework for negotiations to be a framework that “recognises Iran’s rights to peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment.”

The details of this conversation with the Japanese media, published on the Foreign Minister's Telegram channel, are as follows:

Host: The suspension of the Agency's inspections has raised doubts in the international community about Iran's nuclear intentions. How does Iran intend to alleviate these concerns and restore trust in its nuclear program?

Araghchi: I am surprised by your question. It is the United States, the Europeans, and others who must assure us that we can benefit from our right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology without bombardment and attack. We are the ones who have been attacked and have done nothing wrong. Our facilities were under Agency supervision, and there was no deviation towards nuclear weapons; therefore, the onus of building trust this time lies with them, not the other way around.

We were exercising our rights, facilities were under Agency supervision, and we were bombed without any reason or justification. There is no report of Iran's nuclear program deviating towards non-peaceful purposes, and the Director General of the Agency also confirmed a few weeks ago that there is no report of such an intention; therefore, if they want us to return to diplomacy and cooperation with the Agency, it is they who must gain our trust. The United States must guarantee that it will not attack us again while we are negotiating and cooperating with the Agency.

Host: This is the last question. Economic sanctions continue to put great pressure on the Iranian people, yet Iran remains committed to advancing its nuclear program. What is the strategic reason for continuing this approach?

Araghchi: Our nuclear and enrichment technology has been achieved by our own scientists and is not imported. We have paid a very heavy price for it: sanctions, war, more than a thousand martyrs, and assassinated scientists. The blood of our people has been shed for this technology, so we cannot abandon it. Now it is a matter related to Iran's dignity and national pride; it is not something that can be sold. Sanctions, yes, are costly and pressure-filled and create economic problems, but the dignity of a nation is something else, and we do not sell our dignity and pride for something less valuable.

Host: Is there a possibility of resuming negotiations with the United States?

Araghchi: It depends on the United States. If they change their approach and are ready for a fair and balanced negotiation, meaning mutually beneficial negotiations, we are also ready. The reality is that we have no good experience of negotiating with the United States. Just look at what happened in the 2015 nuclear deal, when the United States left the deal for no reason.

Look also at the negotiations this year, in 2025, when we were negotiating, and the Israelis attacked us with American support, and the United States also joined in the attack; and look at the negotiations a few months ago in New York regarding the snapback issue.

We concluded that the Americans are not ready for mutually beneficial negotiations based on equality and mutual respect. As soon as we conclude that they are ready for such negotiations, we can resume talks. The point is that negotiation is different from dictation. For now, we are not convinced that they are ready for serious and real negotiations; they want to dictate, and I am not one to listen to the dictation of others.

Host: What is the main point of disagreement?

Araghchi: The main point is for the United States to recognise Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment. This has been our right and still is our right under international law. We are a committed member of the NPT and, like Japan, have the right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology. Japan is also a committed NPT member and benefits from its rights. We only want our rights and want to exercise them, and this is done under the full supervision of the Agency.

In the 2015 nuclear deal, we even accepted measures beyond the NPT and the Additional Protocol to create more confidence in the peaceful nature of our program and gave the Agency more monitoring capabilities, but still, the United States left; therefore, we are confident about the peaceful nature of our nuclear program and have no problem sharing that confidence with others. That is what we did in the nuclear deal and are ready to do again: building confidence about our nuclear program to ensure its peaceful nature in exchange for the removal of sanctions.

As soon as they accept this logic, meaning confidence-building regarding Iran's peaceful nuclear program in exchange for the removal of sanctions, we can resume negotiations, and I believe we will reach a result quickly.

Host: From Iran's perspective, what is a reasonable and acceptable framework for new negotiations?

Araghchi: An acceptable framework recognises Iran's right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology, including enrichment, and we are ready to build confidence for it. We can even accept monitoring mechanisms beyond the NPT and accept time-limited restrictions for confidence-building.

Like what we did in the nuclear deal, for example, in the JCPOA, we accepted that uranium enrichment would only be up to 3.67% and for 15 years, not forever; therefore, nothing can be accepted forever. The only thing we are ready to accept permanently is Iran's commitment to never build nuclear weapons.

But for the peaceful use of nuclear technology, we may accept time-limited restrictions for building confidence, such as limits on enrichment levels and the type of machinery. But these restrictions are only for a specified period, not forever, because we cannot decide for future generations. The only thing we can decide and are confident about is that Iran will never seek nuclear weapons; this is a permanent commitment.
As I said, our fundamental policy is a permanent commitment that Iran will never seek nuclear weapons. But if they want some aspects of our nuclear program to be limited for confidence-building, we can do that, but not forever, only for a specific period, and as long as necessary for confidence-building.

Host: In the aftermath of the 12-day war, is there a prospect for resuming Iran-Japan cooperation in the field of nuclear safety? Because Japan has a lot of knowledge in this area.

Araghchi: The reality is, as you mentioned, during the 12-day war, our nuclear facilities were bombed, destroyed, and seriously damaged. This is clearly a major violation of international law and perhaps the greatest violation of international law, because a peaceful nuclear facility under Agency supervision was bombed. This has created serious risks and challenges: radiation risks, unexploded ordnance at the facilities, and, as you know, threats continue. Now we also face security threats and safety concerns.

Unfortunately, there is no precedent for bombing a peaceful nuclear facility; therefore, there is no protocol or guideline for inspecting such facilities. This was my question to the Director General of the Agency: Is there a method or protocol for inspecting such facilities? They said no, because there is no precedent. This is the first time a supervised peaceful nuclear facility has been bombed; therefore, we cannot resume inspections unless we agree on a method for inspecting bombed facilities. We entered into negotiations with the Agency to reach this agreement, and the Cairo cooperation framework was obtained to solve this issue.

The Agency must accept that we need a new cooperation framework. But unfortunately, after the agreement in Cairo, the three European countries and America pursued the snapback mechanism at the Security Council, which was illegal, and we don't think they had the right to activate this mechanism.

From our perspective, as well as that of two permanent members of the Security Council, Russia and China, and more than 120 member countries of the Non-Aligned Movement, the snapback mechanism has not been activated, and previous Security Council resolutions and sanctions have not been reinstated. However, I told the three European countries and America that if you go for snapback, the framework of Iran-Agency cooperation, i.e., the Cairo agreement, will no longer be valid, and we will have to revise it; and unfortunately, that is what happened. Now we are in contact with Mr. Grossi, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, to resume this cooperation.

Your question about safety concerns is valid. This brings us to the topic of possible cooperation with Japan. Japan has experience with nuclear bombs and their consequences for environmental safety and people's health, and also has the experience of the Fukushima power plant that was destroyed by the tsunami. I was an ambassador in Tokyo at that time and visited that area; therefore, I do not doubt that Japan has good knowledge about improving the safety of nuclear facilities, and this knowledge can be shared with Iran.

For the future, Iran is fully determined to continue its peaceful nuclear program. As I have said in numerous interviews, the facilities and machinery have been destroyed, but the technology has not been destroyed, and our will has not been lost. We are still determined and possess the technology. We have a large number of scientists and technicians, and under international law, we have the right to the peaceful use of nuclear technology; therefore, I think cooperation with Japan in this field is achievable, and I am sure it will be very beneficial.

Host: So, what role do you think the Agency will have in Iran's nuclear inspections in the future?

Araghchi: Inspection is one thing, and safety concerns are another. Inspections are the Agency's duty, and we are in close contact with them. As I said, there are many security and safety concerns, and before these concerns are addressed, inspections cannot be resumed. But when our relations with the Agency return to normal, cooperation with Japan could be beneficial in the technical aspects of these safety challenges.

Host: What roles are there for Japan in nuclear inspections?

Araghchi: Inspection is something the Agency decides, and we cannot interfere in it. But we have a very good experience of cooperation with Japanese inspectors. When the late Japanese Director General Amano was the Director General of the Agency, we had excellent cooperation with him. The 2015 nuclear deal was achieved when he was Director General, and he played a key and helpful role in achieving it. Cooperation with Japanese inspectors and officials at the Agency and elsewhere has been very useful and can continue in the future.

Host: Can we talk about Iran-Japan relations, as you have experience in Japan? Japan now has a new government. How do you assess the prospect of strengthening Iran-Japan relations in the field of nuclear policy and engagement with America?

Araghchi: Iran-Japan relations have always been very good and friendly. These relations go back many years and have always been based on mutual interests and mutual respect. I must say we have no bilateral problems. Problems stem from outside our bilateral relations. It is a fact that Japan is an ally of the United States, but at the same time, it is a friend of Iran. Our relations have always been friendly, and this allows us to cooperate more with Japan than with many Western countries. This is something we have witnessed over the past few decades.

Japan has a very good reputation in Iran; it is a respected country. Our automotive industry has always benefited from Japanese technology, and other Japanese technologies and innovations are well-known and accepted in Iran. We have been a supplier of crude oil to Japan, which is not possible now due to sanctions. After the 2015 nuclear deal, Japan was the first country to enter and resume its economic relations with Iran. The reason was the strong foundations of our bilateral relations, and I am sure that when sanctions are lifted again, Iran-Japan economic relations can quickly return to normal.