(Approaching the fortieth day of the martyrdom of the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic of Iran)
Over the past nine months, the United States and the Zionist regime have twice on 25th June, 2025, and 28th February, 2026 conducted armed attacks and military aggression against the territorial integrity of the Islamic Republic of Iran, occurring in the midst of indirect negotiations mediated by the Sultanate of Oman.
This act is entirely illegal, aggressive, and contrary to all rules of international law, including a manifest violation of Article 2, paragraph 4, of the United Nations Charter.
There is no doubt that, under all norms of international law, such armed attacks and acts of aggression incur grave responsibilities: the martyrdom of the highest authority of the Islamic Republic of Iran and that of thousands of civilians specifically 175 students of the Minab school as well as the destruction of economic infrastructure, housing, scientific and academic centers, historical sites, and cultural heritage.
These acts engage not only the international responsibility of the aggressor states but also the international criminal responsibility of individuals. The aggressors and the initiators of the war must be held accountable and brought to justice.
The Islamic Republic of Iran, in accordance with Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, has also exercised its right of self-defence in the face of this manifest aggression and military attack, in order to protect its independence, territorial integrity, and national sovereignty.
This defence has fortunately led to an exceptional strengthening of national cohesion.
The primary pretext used by the United States and the Zionist regime to justify their military attack is the Iranian nuclear programme.
To enlighten public opinion and respond to this erroneous claim, it should be emphasised that Iran’s nuclear programme is entirely peaceful in nature, as has been officially declared on numerous occasions.
The Islamic Republic of Iran has clearly and repeatedly affirmed that it has never sought, does not seek, and will never seek to acquire, produce, or use nuclear weapons for several reasons: Iran is a member of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and has ratified the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT).
All members of these two institutions have the right to use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes (energy production, medicine, scientific research, etc).
Before the current war, 120 IAEA inspectors monitored Iranian nuclear facilities, and the Agency’s cameras ensured continuous surveillance 24 hours a day. Furthermore, the IAEA, as well as 16 American security and intelligence agencies, have, through 16 reports, confirmed that Iran had not deviated in any way from its nuclear programme.
Moreover, the Supreme Leader and religious authority of the Islamic Republic of Iran, through a fatwa, declared the production and use of any weapon of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, as illicit (haram).
In contrast, the Zionist regime reportedly possesses 200 to 400 nuclear warheads and is a member of neither the NPT nor the IAEA. The world suffers from these double standards.
More importantly: Donald Trump has stated and repeated several times that during the June 2025 attack, Iranian nuclear facilities were bombed, destroyed, and annihilated.
Why, then, attack Iran again on 28th February, 2026, under the same pretext while continuing to insist on the nuclear programme? Since the year 2000, Benjamin Netanyahu has falsely claimed every year that Iran would achieve a nuclear weapon within six months. Today, 26 years have passed, and he continues to repeat the same claims to divert world public opinion.
However, the public is well aware of the realities and no longer grants importance to these lies.
From Iran’s perspective, sustainable regional security will not be ensured by nuclear weapons, but by dialogue, transparency, mutual respect, and the creation of a region free of weapons of mass destruction.
Another important point concerns the targeting of American military bases and enemy objectives in third countries during this conflict. It should be emphasized that Iran maintains no hostility toward neighboring and brotherly countries and has no intention of undermining the territorial integrity or national sovereignty of any state, particularly neighboring and friendly countries.
Iran has only targeted, in accordance with international law, facilities used by the aggressors in those countries against it, while exercising precaution to avoid any damage to other targets.
It is also necessary to specify that the Zionist regime, by targeting certain objectives outside military bases in third countries, seeks to attribute them to Iran in order to turn these countries against it. The principle policy of the Islamic Republic of Iran has always been based on good neighbourliness, mutual respect, and the preservation of regional stability.
Regarding the closure of the strategic Strait of Hormuz, it should be noted that in times of war, the conditions for passage through international straits differ, and the country victim of aggression may, within the framework of defensive measures, impose certain restrictions.
Prior to the military attack by the United States and the Zionist regime, Iran was always in favor of freedom of navigation and free trade. The current situation results from the erroneous decisions of the United States and the Zionist regime.
At present, the Strait of Hormuz is closed only to the United States, the Zionist regime, and their allies, and remains open to other countries. The Strait of Hormuz was open, and it was the action of the United States that led to its closure; today, they are attempting to reopen it. One cannot remedy the consequences of one’s own acts.
It should be recalled that the Middle East is one of the world’s primary centers for energy production and transit. Any escalation in this region can affect global energy markets, maritime trade, and economic stability.
The Zionist regime and the United States those corrupt Epstein terrorists who, after failing to achieve their objectives, now find themselves in increasing disarray are increasingly resorting to targeting vital facilities and economic, pharmaceutical, energy, and industrial infrastructures, as well as indiscriminate attacks against innocent civilians.
However, more than 40 days have passed since this illegal conflict began, and the Islamic Republic of Iran, through its indescribable resistance and cohesion, defends its interests and attacks those of its enemies, thereby displaying a manifest victory.
The Americans and the Israelis, who began this conflict thinking they could force Iran to surrender, now find themselves bogged down without an exit strategy. In contrast, the Iranians have achieved a historic feat in their resistance. Recent developments in the Middle East have shown that the decision of the United States and the Israeli regime to act militarily against Iran was based on a set of erroneous strategic calculations. This action has not only failed to achieve the announced objectives but has also increased tensions, regional instability, and sparked widespread concerns within the international system, the responsibility for which lies with the aggressors namely, the United States and the Zionist regime.
In such circumstances, it is incumbent upon the international community and regional actors to rely on the principles of international law and diplomacy to prevent the escalation of the crisis and strengthen peaceful avenues for dispute resolution; for stability in the Middle East is crucial not only for the countries of the region but also for the security and well-being of the entire world.
The world must understand that, according to the principles of the United Nations Charter, the use of force and military attacks against the territorial integrity or political independence of a state without authorisation from the Security Council can weaken the international legal order and international organisations.
This could establish a dangerous practice in the international system, where military powers resort to unilateral actions rather than legal and diplomatic mechanisms. The strengthening of multilateralism, respect for the principles of international law, the creation of collective security mechanisms in the region, and the return to diplomacy and dialogue can contribute to reducing tensions and preventing the expansion of the crisis. Without such an approach, the risk that the region, or even the entire world, enters a cycle of instability and dangerous rivalries remains high.
The statement was translated from French by Professor Dr Sufi Atif Amin Al Hussiani.
