Iran's Response to Trump's Letter Left Room for Diplomacy: Araqchi
Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi hosted ambassadors and heads of diplomatic missions at a ceremony in Tehran on Saturday night to mark the Persian New Year (Nowruz).
The event was also attended by some Iranian ministers and military officials. During the ceremony, Croatian Ambassador Drago Stambuk congratulated the audience on the arrival of spring and Nowruz, encouraging them to embrace the essence of Nowruz, which emphasizes solidarity among humans, peace, and peaceful coexistence.
Following this, Foreign Minister Araqchi extended his congratulations to the attendees on the occasion of Nowruz and Eid al-Fitr, which marks the conclusion of the holy month of Ramadan.
He described the past Iranian year as a time of significant incidents and challenges for Iran and the West Asia region. The minister reaffirmed the Islamic Republic's commitment to pursuing its principled and responsible policies in the New Year, which began on March 21, 2025.
Araqchi also discussed Iran's stance toward international developments, saying that the country's response to U.S. President Donald Trump's letter was consistent with its content and tone, while still allowing room for diplomacy.
In his remarks, he highlighted the peaceful nature of Iran's nuclear program. He said that Tehran has undertaken voluntary efforts to demonstrate the peaceful nature of its nuclear activities, adding that it was the United States that unilaterally withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal.
Araqchi highlighted Iran's foreign policy towards neighboring countries and other nations around the world, expressing hope that mutual ties in political, economic, and cultural areas would expand in the year ahead.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Ya Libnan
31 minutes ago
- Ya Libnan
Let Iran have its Bomb—And let it eat it
By: Ya Libnan Editoria Board As tensions rise across the Middle East, fears are once again swirling around Iran's nuclear ambitions. The debate is painfully familiar: Should the West negotiate, pressure, threaten, or even attack to stop Iran from developing a nuclear bomb? But maybe it's time to consider an unconventional and counterintuitive approach— let Iran have its bomb. For over two decades, Iran has insisted that its nuclear program is solely for peaceful purposes, such as generating electricity. But the facts tell a different story. Civilian nuclear reactors require uranium enriched to no more than 3.5%. Iran has enriched uranium to over 60%. This is not for light bulbs and water heaters—this is weapons-grade ambition. Tehran has been bluffing, and the world has been playing along. So what happens if we stop the game? Suppose the United States and the international community step back and say: Fine. Build your bomb. And then ask the real question: What can Iran actually do with it? Iran is one of the most populous and vulnerable countries in the region. If it ever uses a nuclear weapon, the response would be swift and devastating. The country would suffer unimaginable losses. Nuclear war is not a win-or-lose scenario—it's mutual suicide. Iranian leaders know that. The regime might be extreme, but it isn't irrational. Israel has had nuclear weapons for decades. Despite its numerous wars in the Middle East, it has never used them. Its arsenal exists not as an offensive tool, but as a deterrent. India and Pakistan are another example. Once caught in repeated wars, they haven't fought a full-scale war since both became nuclear-armed states. Their most recent skirmish lasted just a few days. Possessing the bomb didn't embolden them—it restrained them. China, too, has nuclear weapons. It dreams of reunifying with Taiwan, yet despite its massive military power, it has never come close to using a nuclear weapon to achieve that goal. Even in the Russia-Ukraine war, where brutality and escalation have defined more than three years of fighting, the nuclear threshold has not been crossed. Both nations understand that line must not be breached. The pattern is clear: the bomb is not a license to destroy—it is a sentence to self-containment. Iran, meanwhile, is already paying a steep economic price for its nuclear defiance. Sanctions have strangled its economy, driven inflation to crippling levels, and ignited waves of internal unrest. If Iran doesn't strike a deal with the U.S. and continues down this path of isolation and provocation, the economic pressure will only intensify. That pressure—combined with public frustration and demands for freedom—could ignite something even more powerful than a bomb: an internal revolution. Let Iran keep investing in a weapon it cannot use. Let it waste precious resources while its people grow poorer and angrier. In doing so, the regime may dig its own grave— from within. So yes, let Iran have its bomb—and let it eat it.
Ya Libnan
11 hours ago
- Ya Libnan
Growing fears of massive strikes on Iran as nuclear negotiations sputter
If the U.S.-Iranian talks fail, and strikes on Iran occur, the ramifications could be very far-reaching. U.S. President Donald Trump has been presented with a broad array of potential military options against Iran should ongoing nuclear negotiations with that country fail. Israel is already reportedly moving ever closer to at least being in a position to launch its own strikes on Iranian nuclear sites . The direct and indirect blowback from any such operations against Iran could be immense. Fears that U.S.-Iranian nuclear talks are on the verge of collapse have been steadily growing in the past week or so amid statements from both sides outlining potentially intractable positions. Iran's ability to continue domestic enrichment of nuclear material that could be used to produce nuclear weapons has emerged as a key stumbling block to reaching a deal. 'If the President directed [it], is CENTCOM [U.S. Central Command] prepared to respond with overwhelming force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran?' Congressman Mike Rogers, an Alabama Republican, asked U.S. Army Gen. Michael 'Erik' Kurilla at a hearing of the House Armed Services Committee today. Kurilla is currently head of CENTCOM, making him the top officer overseeing operations across the Middle East. 'I have provided the Secretary of Defense [Pete Hegseth] and the President [Trump] a wide range of options,' Kurilla said in response. 'I take that as a yes?' Rogers, the present chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, asked in return, appearing to refer to the specific wording of his question, to include the possible use of 'overwhelming force.' 'Yes,' Kurrila said. Top U.S. military commander in the Middle East General Kurilla confirms that he has presented military options on Iran to President Trump & SecDef Hegseth in House Armed Services Committee this morning. It is important to note here that U.S. presidents and defense secretaries regularly ask to be briefed on potential military options in light of crises or heightened risks of one erupting. Being presented with a full range of operational possibilities, including large-scale strikes or other significant direct action, does not mean the United States is automatically committed to pursuing any specific course of action, something we will come back to later on. Publicly, Trump has consistently advocated for reaching a deal with Iran to avoid any need to take military action, though he has also raised the possibility of military action in the event talks reach a dead end. He has separately said that he has pressed his Israeli counterpart, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to hold off on striking Iranian targets while negotiations are ongoing. There have been reports of significant friction between the two leaders , as well. Amid all this, the U.S. president is said to be facing increasingly intense pressure from a faction of domestic political allies to acquiesce to and/or join in on Israeli attacks on Iran, according to a new report just today from Politico . TWZ
Nahar Net
15 hours ago
- Nahar Net
Army returns to building in Hadath with bulldozer
by Naharnet Newsdesk 11 June 2025, 15:27 Army forces returned Wednesday with a bulldozer to a building they searched Tuesday at the request of the five-member committee supervising the Israel-Hezbollah ceasefire. The building in the densely populated Sainte-Therese street in Hadath in Beirut's southern suburbs had been targeted by an Israeli strike during the 14-month Israel-Hezbollah war. A Lebanese military official said Tuesday that the army was looking for weapons. On Friday, Israel warned that it would keep up its strikes on Hezbollah targets across Lebanon, after it struck four locations in Dahieh on the eve of the Muslim holiday of Eid al-Adha. The Lebanese army condemned the airstrikes, warning that such attacks are weakening the role of Lebanon's armed forces that might eventually suspend cooperation with the committee monitoring the truce that ended the Israel-Hezbollah war. It said it had tried to convince Israel not to carry out the strikes and to instead let Lebanese officials go in to search the area under the mechanism laid out in the ceasefire agreement, but that the Israeli army refused, so Lebanese soldiers moved away from the locations after they were sent.
