Tehran: Iran’s military and diplomatic sectors operated in full synchronization during Israel’s 12-day aggression and ongoing indirect negotiations with the United States, according to a prominent Iranian diplomat. Kazem Gharibabadi, the deputy foreign minister for legal and international affairs, emphasized this coordinated approach on national television.

According to Islamic Republic News Agency, Gharibabadi highlighted the necessity for political and diplomatic sectors to align closely with military and defense efforts amid threats. He noted that during both the negotiations with the U.S. and the war, the coordination between Iran’s Foreign Ministry and Armed Forces reached its peak. He clarified that all actions were executed in complete harmony, countering any notion of disjointed efforts between the two entities.

Israel’s unprovoked aggression against Iran, which began on June 13, included targeted assassinations of military commanders and nuclear scientists, alongside air raids that resulted in civilian casualties. This conflict coincided with Tehran’s ongoing negotiations with Washington regarding Iran’s civilian nuclear program.

Gharibabadi underscored Iran’s steadfast negotiation stance, particularly the insistence on securing Iran’s rights. He also observed a regional shift in perception, with countries now recognizing Israel as the real threat, as opposed to Iran. This change, he suggested, was a result of the conflict and Iran’s subsequent victory.

He further mentioned Israel’s appeal to Washington for a ceasefire following Iran’s military retaliation, stating Iran had not sought a ceasefire and was prepared to continue its defense. Gharibabadi criticized Britain, Germany, and France for aligning with Israel, stating that their reputations suffered as a result, and noted that only the U.S. and these European nations supported Israel’s actions.

Addressing potential European moves to reactivate the snapback mechanism for reimposing U.N. sanctions on Iran, Gharibabadi indicated that Iran had received no official notice but was prepared for such a scenario. He warned that resorting to snapback would exclude those countries from diplomatic engagement with Iran and stressed the importance of taking measures to prevent it without making concessions. Any move toward snapback, he asserted, would render further nuclear or sanctions-related negotiations meaningless.