US national security threatened by own unwise leaders: SNSC spox

TEHRAN, Dec. 14 (MNA) – Spokesman for Iran's Supreme National Security Council has rebuked the remarks by US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook that the anti-Iran sanctions were in place to safeguard US’ national security.

Speaking to Qatari-based Al Jazeera, Keyvan Khosravi, spokesman for Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said “the US national security is threatened by the country’s own unwise leaders, whose unilateral, unlawful and tension-building decisions have turned the whole world against the country.”

His remarks were in reaction to recent comments by US Special Representative for Iran Brian Hook, who said that the aim of imposing sanctions on Iran was to prevent threats against the US national security,

“The US’ failure to comply with legal obligations and its instrumental use of economic sanctions and economic terrorism that is pursued with no goal other than to put pressure on the livelihood, health and development of the Iranian people, is a stupid justification for a crime against the people who, with all instances of broken promises to them, are still abiding by their commitments,” he added, in reference to the US’ unilateral withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal, and Iran’s continued commitment to the agreement.

He went on to say, “with the withdrawal of an international agreement backed by UN Security Council Resolution 2231, the United States has practically challenged global peace and security and cannot escape accountability before the global public opinion by faking willingness to hold talks.”

He then reacted to Hook’s remark about prisoner swap with Iran, and his hope that the exchange would lead to broader discussions with Iran, saying “the exchange of prisoners, carried out by Iran without any negotiations on the basis of a humanitarian approach, is not the beginning of a new path, but the end of the excruciating conditions of innocent people who were held captive by the US for ransom.”


News Code 153359


Your Comment

You are replying to: .
  • captcha