Trump’s threat of bombing on the Iranian nuclear program invites jet reactions | Iran

Iran reacted with indignation after Donald Trump said that the country is bombed if it does not accept American requests to limit its nuclear program.

The American president said on Sunday that if Iran “(did not make) do not conclude an agreement, there will be bombings. It will be bombings as they have never seen before. ”.

Trump’s last threat – more explicit and violent than everything that has been done before – came after sending a letter to Iran, not yet disclosed, offering conferences on his nuclear program. Iran had sent an answer to the United States declaring that it was willing to hold indirect talks, officials confirmed.

Esmail Baghaei, spokesperson for the Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said about Trump’s threat: “The explicit threat of bombing Iran by the head of a country is a clear contradiction with the essence of international peace and security.

“Such a threat is a blatant violation of the United Nations Charter and a violation of the International Safeguarding Agency of the Atomic Energy Agency.

The supreme chief, the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, skeptical of talks with the United States, said that Iran was “not too concerned” by Trump’s words. “We consider that it is unlikely that such damage comes from outside. However, if a malicious act occurs, it will certainly be welcomed with a company
And a decisive response, “he said.

Brig Gen Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of the aerospace force of the revolutionary goalkeeper, said: “Someone in glass houses does not throw stones on anyone”, adding: “The Americans have at least 10 bases with 50,000 soldiers in the region, which means they are sitting in a glass house.”

But the Iranian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Abbas Araghchi, clearly had the power to maintain the prospect of talks alive, saying that Iran had already responded to the letter Trump through intermediaries to Oman and adding that he knew that the Iranian letter had now reached the United States. Araghchi said direct talks were not possible while the United States continued to threaten and intimidate Iran.

Trump sent his original letter offering discussions through the main diplomatic envoy to the United Arab Emirates, Anwar Gargash.

Gargash’s choice as an intermediary was considered a sign that the letter was aimed at giving negotiations a real chance, rather than letting Iran else have something other than rejecting the offer of talks.

Trump has established a deadline for mid-May for the progress to be made, but a longer deadline also exists in mid-August, the date on which the original nuclear agreement of 2015 will widely expire and a European response will be necessary. Trump removed the United States from this agreement in 2018, a decision widely considered an error because it led Iran to accelerate its uranium enrichment program.

The fact that Iran has sent its response by Oman, its traditional mediator chosen, rather than water, Iran does not want water – which have normalized relations with Israel – act as intermediaries. The United States and Iran had indirect talks on the recovery of the nuclear agreement under the Biden administration in Vienna from 2021, but they failed, and all the parties agreed from the indirect nature of the talks ate time, something that Trump is reluctant to offer to Iran.

Part of the field will have been covered by four cycles of parallel talks between Iranian and European negotiators in Geneva.

Tehran did not comment how much Trump’s letter has been required from Iran. But the Iranian ambassador to Iraq, Mohammad Kazem Al-Sadegh, said that the United States asked for talks that have expanded that the nuclear program, saying that the letter called for the dissolution of the Iraqi popular mobilization militia supported by Iran.

The American administration was divided on the opportunity to simply ask Iran to expose its civil nuclear program to a more complete international inspection, or to make a wider set of requests, in particular a full end to its nuclear program and an Iranian commitment to stop the banking groups in the Middle East such as Hamas in Gaza and the Houthis in Yemen.

US National Security Advisor Mike Waltz called for the “complete dismantling” of the Iranian nuclear program, which Tehran rejects. On the other hand, Steve Witkoff, Trump’s special envoy, only spoke of restricting the nuclear program of Iran, which Iran is willing to accept since 2015 as long as it leads to a lifting of sanctions against the Iranian economy. Some inside the Trump administration believe that an attack on Iranian nuclear installations will produce a change of diet.

Trump will at least want insurance that a relaunched Iranian economy will not only lead to additional funds for the militia supported by Iran. Kamal Kharazi, head of the Iranian Strategic Council for Foreign Relations and sometimes presented as chief negotiator, accused the United States of making a psychological war by adopting a “war or negotiation” policy.

The generalized rejection in the gulf of an American inspiration against Iranian nuclear installations is a relatively new factor in the equation, and Trump’s plan to visit Saudi Arabia during his first trip abroad means that he could personally hear a strong opposition to an attack against Iran of the Saudi Crown Prince, Mohammed Bin Salman.

The opposition of the Gulf to an attack on Iran is not based on a narrow ideological affinity with Iran, but on a meaning, the region must avoid a new political instability, and with the current Iranian management already weakened, the change of diet is not something that they are delighted.