Iran's Foreign Ministry Rejects "Iran Conflict" Frame
On October 23, Iranian Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Nasser Kanaani issued a statement offering a stark critique of the terminology used to describe current Middle East tensions. He asserted that the phrase "Iran conflict," emerging in some international discourse, is a fundamental distortion of reality.
"A War of Aggression, Not a Conflict"
Kanaani stressed that there is no such thing as an "Iran conflict." Instead, he characterized the situation as an illegal war of aggression waged against Iran by the United States and Israel. He argued that using terms like "conflict" is a misleading euphemism designed to obscure the war's unlawful and aggressive nature.
"Refusing to call aggression by its name is not neutrality; it is moral evasion," Kanaani stated. He posed a pointed question: "If we lack the courage to identify the aggressor and clearly name the act of aggression, how can we claim to have the courage to confront injustice, propose viable solutions, or contribute substantively to peace?"
The Path to Genuine Peace
The spokesperson outlined his view on the prerequisites for achieving peace. He argued that peace cannot be realized through:
- Appeasing the aggressor: Adopting a policy of conciliation towards the party that initiated hostilities.
- Legitimizing aggression: Creating narratives that justify acts of aggression.
- Condemning the victim: Attributing blame to the party that is under attack.
- Sacrificing fundamental principles: Abandoning international law and ethical standards for a temporary ceasefire.
This statement is seen as Iran's formal characterization of recent regional escalations, clearly delineating a line between "defense" and "being aggressed upon," and calling for a more principled stance from the international community both morally and rhetorically.