Quotes of All Topics . Occasions . Authors
If anything caused ISIS, it was the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.
You cannot have security at the expense of the insecurity of others.
Even for defeating extremists, you need more than a military strategy.
I have no problem saying that I have differences in policy with the United States.
That's the problem with the United States. It believes it can control everybody's behavior.
Nuclear talks are not about nuclear capability. They are about Iranian integrity and dignity.
Iran's military hardware is less than a fraction of that of any of the countries in this region.
One outcome is almost certain. Extremism stands to benefit enormously from an uncalculated adventure in Iraq.
Tehran believes it's none of our business or anybody else's to decide the future of personalities in other countries.
Understanding that these statements do not represent reality, we should not be threatened by the language that he has used.
I have disagreements with some and more agreements with others. But that doesn't mean I cannot listen to those I disagree with.
The Persian Gulf is our lifeline ... We will respect international navigation, for us, freedom of navigation in the Persian Gulf is a must.
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.
We've never declared war on anybody. We [Iran] defended ourselves against wars that were imposed on us. We have no desire to engage in confrontation with anybody.
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.
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 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.
We call upon the nuclear-weapon states to immediately cease their plans to further invest in modernizing and extending the life span of their nuclear weapons and related facilities.
Nobody thinks identically on Syria. But we share the same view with Russia that the future of the personalities in Syria will be determined by the people of Syria and not by people outside Syria.
It is important for everybody to insure that the process will go on, that the ceasefire will hold. Of course, there is no ceasefire against Daesh [the Islamic State], Jabhat al Nusra, and Al Qaeda.
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'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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
We're [Iran] not dismantling anything. We are uninstalling some centrifuges and reconstructing the Arak reactor, modernizing it. . . . The remaining activities that we need undertake will not take more than several days, less than two weeks.
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.
We try to coordinate regularly with Russia, as well as with others - except for the United States - on what is happening in the region. And we're open to discussing with everybody the situation in Syria, because we believe it's a common threat.
The nuclear program is not the only issue dividing Iran and the US. Iran's role in the region is also creating conflicts. For example, you support the Shiite Houthi militias in Yemen whereas the US is on the side of the coalition led by Saudi Arabia.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Wake up to the real world. Look at what's happening in the region. Look at where people are going, how people react to humiliation and marginalization. I do not think a few more votes is worth making this menace - that we all face - far more complicated. People have to wake up to that and respond to that, not politicize it.
I think the most important challenge that remains is this mentality in Washington that sanctions have been an asset, and some people want to find even an excuse to keep them or an excuse to reintroduce them. I don't know whether they've looked at the record of how sanctions actually produce exactly the opposite of what they wanted to produce.
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.
I think we are making an assumption that that is the outcome of the negotiations. I think President Assad will be prepared to accept whatever the outcome of the intra-Syrian dialogue and the decision of the Syrian people is. But people are trying to decide and determine the outcome of the negotiation before even we agree to start the negotiations.
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.
This visa-waiver thing is absurd. Has anybody in the West been targeted by any Iranian national, anybody of Iranian origin, or anyone travelling to Iran? Whereas many people have been targeted by the nationals of your allies, people visiting your allies, and people transiting the territory of, again, your allies. So you're looking at the wrong address.
People have been fed misinformation. The fact is that the fighting that is going on on the ground in Syria is with Al Qaeda, with Jabhat al Nusra, with Daesh. The pockets, small pockets, of other groups are usually surrounded by these various extremist groups. . . . Once they stop fighting, there is nothing for the Syrian government to hit other than the terrorist organizations.
We consider ISIS and extremism to be a threat to all of us in the region. . . . Our position is that we help the legitimate governments in the region that have representation in the United Nations. We help the Iraqi government on their request through advisers; we help the Syrian government on their request to help with advisers to fight extremists. . . . So it's both lawful and legitimate.
You know where the people who killed people in San Bernardino came from. You know where people who did 9/11 came from. You know where the people who did Paris came from, where they transited, where they went. None of them even set foot in Iran. So why are you punishing people who are visiting Iran for that? . . . We're not going to radicalize them. We never have. Your allies have radicalized people who visited.
So there are two separate tracks. One track is for the Syrian government and the opposition that is interested in a peaceful future of Syria to come together for national unity, for the political process. At the same time, it is a requirement for everybody to stop supporting the extremist groups, to stop allowing them safe passage, to stop allowing them to receive weapons, to stop allowing them to receive financial assistance, and to come together in actually fighting them.