This would have been a bad deal if Iran had sought an A-bomb

President Rouhani has said that the whole world, excluding a usurping regime [a reference to Israel] and a group of political hawks in another country [the US], are happy with the nuclear deal Iran and P5+1 clinched on July 14.

The president made the comment in a ceremony in Tehran on Saturday to mark National Defense Industry Day. Tasnim News Agency on August 22 covered the president’s remarks at the ceremony and the following is the translation of parts of what he said:

A weak country which cannot defend itself against its rivals cannot claim to be seeking peace. Such a country should always brace for being occupied and see its national interests jeopardized.

During the talks, Iranian diplomats were sensitive about the country’s defense industries. People will learn about the details of the talks when their documents are made public. The only thing that is included in the deal is that Iran does not build a missile which can carry a nuclear warhead. Iran has never been after that.

Today the country’s conditions are better than one or two years ago, because the nation has managed to build on its political capabilities to reach an agreement with which all world nations are happy, except a warmongering regime and a group of hawks in another country.

In one sense, if a country is after weapons of mass destruction, this agreement [the Iran nuclear deal] would be a bad deal. If Iran had sought to develop an atomic bomb, the Vienna accord would not have been a good deal. If a country is not seeking to kill the innocent people and – in line with logic, wisdom, its religious principles and its leader’s fatwa – is after peaceful technology, not WMDs, the Vienna accord would be a good deal with no shortcomings.

When a dependent country gains power, it turns into a regional gendarme. A country which obeys the orders of a superpower, its power fails to bring about peace.

At a time when the region is insecure and strangers are in Iran’s surroundings, we cannot sit idly by and not care [about the country’s fate]. At a time when big powers have launched a proxy war through terrorists who create tensions in the region in the name of Islam and Jihad, we cannot remain ignorant of the country’s defensive power. We have to be ready, equipped and powerful.

It took the world centuries to change the word ‘war’ into: ‘defense’. But Islam replaced war with defense [from day one]. All Jihads in Islam had defensive purposes: defense of lands or defense of faith and freedom.

In Iran too, we had a ministry of war. It changed into the ministry of defense when the late Mossadegh was in power. Those behind the [1953] coup [which overthrew the Mossadegh government] could not stand a name which was chosen by a legitimate government and re-changed it into the ministry of war. After the victory of the Islamic Revolution, this ministry was once again renamed as the Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics.

This [ministry of war or defense] is not just a name; it has a rich content. Iran’s ideal is defense, not war. Iran’s religion and establishment is democracy-based, not war-based. We are not after war and aggression. There are countries in the world whose military doctrines prescribe war and aggression. […]

Iran’s defense industries are geared for defending our territories, establishment and interests. We have not been and won’t be after aggression. […] Once we were attacked by Iraq, but when this country plunged into troubles, Iran did not take action against it. […]

After the collapse of the former Soviet Union, Iran went to the help of its northern neighbors instead of taking action against those [newly independent] republics. This shows Iran favors culture, art and civilization.