Even for defeating extremists, you need more than a military strategy.
— Mohammad Javad Zarif
If you look at the developments in the international scene over the past many years, we haven't been able to resolve many problems and many crises, because we have approached them from a zero-sum perspective. My gain has always been defined as somebody else's loss, and through that, we never resolve problems.
If anything caused ISIS, it was the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
It is time for Iran and other stakeholders to begin to address the causes of tension in the wider Persian Gulf region. We need a sober assessment of the complex and intertwined realities here and consistent policies to deal with them. The fight against terror is a case in point.
Maybe the future of Syria will not be a presidential system where one person will have all the power, so, the discussion about who should and should not rule Syria will become irrelevant. Let the Syrian people decide.
In order to practice dialogue, you need to be able to set aside your assumptions and try to listen more than you want to talk. It's not always politically correct to be able to do that, but it can give you a better sense of the reality.
Nuclear talks are not about nuclear capability. They are about Iranian integrity and dignity.
I have lost every respect for U.S. justice. The judgment by the Supreme Court and the other, even more absurd judgment by a New York circuit court deciding that Iran should pay damages for 9/11 are the height of absurdity.
The Iranian people are known for adhering to their undertakings. We have been tested by history. We're an old civilization. We've been tested by history. We haven't aggressed upon any country for 250 years. This is a history that I'm proud of.
Iran is not about building nuclear weapons. We don't wanna build nuclear weapons. We don't believe that nuclear weapons bring security to anybody, certainly not to us.
I think the United States, whether you have a Democratic president or whether you have a Republican president, is bound by international law, whether some senators like it or not.
Actually, if you look at the essence of ISIS, how it came about, it's the product of foreign invasion. Foreign invasion in Iraq led to removal of Saddam Hussein, and we're not unhappy with that, but the point is that foreign presence in any territory has created dynamics. And you cannot avoid those dynamics.
The United States wanted to send its trained rebel groups to Syria to fight ISIS. Out of twenty-five hundred rebels they had trained, only seventy accepted to go to Syria to fight ISIS. Everybody else wanted to go to Syria to fight the government. So you've got to wake up and smell the coffee... The rebel groups have not fired a shot against ISIS.
We hope that Saudi Arabia can come to terms with its neighbours, end the hostilities - which can only produce hatred in Yemen - and live peacefully with their neighbours. They cannot blame everything on Iran.
Iran is not in any sort of routine groupings. It's not an Arab country. It's not part of the Indian subcontinent. So it's in a neighborhood where it has some unique characteristics. We are a country which embraced Islam, learned Arabic, but didn't change its language or its culture... That's what keeps us unique.
I'm not that worried about war. Insecurity is the word I would use - insecurity and tension and conflict. I thought civilized people had abandoned wars. Sometimes people don't make rational decisions.
If we can ascertain and show to our people that the West is ready to deal with Iran on the basis of mutual respect and mutual interests and equal footing, then it will have an impact on almost every aspect of Iran's foreign policy behavior - and some aspects of Iran's domestic policy.
International regimes, international treaties, international norms are observed not because of the goodness of anybody but because they bring benefits. If they don't, then the longevity of those agreements come into jeopardy.
I have no problem saying that I have differences in policy with the United States.
Iran did not talk to the United States for 35 years. And now we are talking. And I believe these talks are useful. But they haven't produced the intended results. We have not seen an end to the hostility that has been exhibited in the United States against Iran. And I believe it is important that we see some of that.
It's almost impossible to have security at the expense of insecurity of others. It's almost impossible to have prosperity when there is a huge problem of poverty and backwardness all over the world.
I lived for 30 years in the U.S., but always kept my Islamic and Iranian culture and customs... even now, western lifestyle feels strange to me.
Iran is not interested in a war. Iran is capable of defending itself and teaching a very harsh lesson to anybody who commits aggression against Iran, but we're not interested.
I have disagreements with some and more agreements with others. But that doesn't mean I cannot listen to those I disagree with.
Every statement that comes out of Washington that is not respectful and is trying to intimidate the Iranian people - is trying to put pressure on the Iranian people - strikes that very, very sensitive chord in the Iranian psyche, and they immediately react.
That's the problem with the United States. It believes it can control everybody's behavior.
That's what I do not believe - that dividing Iran into 'reasonable' and 'unreasonable' forces is either correct, conducive, or anybody's business. When the United States exercised that practice in the past, it didn't produce results.
Iran has not invaded any other country. We have not threatened to use force. Just exactly the opposite of Israel. Israel threatens to use force against Iran almost on a daily basis. And it has a record.
