Analysis of US-Iran Relations and Agreements

But to say that, for example, it was

a unilateral action and all that, such a thing is simply impossible.

It is well known among military forces all over the world

that all military work is based on order, discipline,

and organizational hierarchy.

It is impossible for someone to ignore

the organizational hierarchy and, in a

major matter that is, in fact, a war between two

or several countries, take unilateral action.

Such a thing is simply impossible.

Therefore, that action was not unilateral, nor was it

without coordination with higher-ranking officials, and

it was certainly a decisive,

crushing response to America’s third breach of its commitments.

Everyone in the world should know this.

They should know that America breaks its commitments.

America does not honor its commitments. America does not honor its own signature.

America— the JCPOA that

its president had signed, and five other countries had signed,

it tore up,

cast aside, and withdrew from that JCPOA. An America that

attacked the country in the middle of negotiations.

It martyred the country's high-ranking commanders in that attack.

America came and attacked in the midst of negotiations,

martyred the country's leader

and martyred another group of high-ranking commanders, a group of scientists

as well. It martyred about

three or four thousand people.

That same America came again, this

time not during negotiations, but after

the negotiations had reached a result and become

a memorandum of understanding, which two presidents had signed

and were negotiating its implementation,

it once again broke its word. This is not something new

for America, for us to say, “Yes, America wasn't like this, it isn't like that,

it wasn't like this, it didn't do this.” It's not like that at all.

This is America's

nature.

This is America's conduct. This

bad faith seems to exist within

the doctrine of U.S. governance.

Indeed, bad faith and breaking treaties

seem to be, as an unwritten doctrine, within

conduct

There is a ruling establishment in America. And therefore I

firmly declare that our response

was a decisive, strong, and powerful response

to the breach of the fourth commitment,

overall, after the JCPOA and the breach of the third commitment in

these recent negotiations, and it was entirely appropriate, entirely timely

it was, and whenever

such a thing happens, we have this same strong response and

an even stronger one. And if time returns to

that July 6 commitment, once again we will have that same conduct

as well.