Don't boycott Khurzi! Padram Hosseini Yesterday, November 3, the Center for Advanced International Studies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs hosted a conference to commemorate the slain Kamal Harazi; A conference where the prominent presence of JCPOA officials, especially Mohammad Javad Zarif, attracted attention. It is natural to talk about the background and character of a senior diplomat and martyr, but the problem starts from the point where Harazi's narrative is presented as if his intellectual geometry is aligned with the JCPOA process and his view on national security and deterrence. The question is clear: what is the connection between the view of Zarif, who sees nuclear weapons as uncharacteristic precisely in the days when the issue of nuclear deterrence is emphasized again in the world's strategic literature, and the positions of the slain Kamal Kharzi, who even before the start of the two wars put on the table the possibility of explicitly putting the possibility of changing the nuclear. Faced with an existential threat? The murdered Kamal Harazi declared several years ago and even before October 7, July 1401, in an interview with Al-Jazeera: "Iran has the technical ability to build a nuclear bomb and can even easily enrich it to 90%, but it has no decision to build it." This speech was not just an expression of technical ability; This was an introduction to a position that was more clearly expressed two years later. On May 10, 1403, this killer told Al-Jazeera Mubasher: "If Iran's existence is threatened, we will have to change our nuclear doctrine." He even emphasized that if Israel were to damage Iran's nuclear facilities, Iran's level of deterrence would be different; Because deterrence was defined at the accepted level until then. These things reveal the distance between the view of Horug Harazi as the foreign minister of the reformist government and the reformist and ambitious diplomats who are actually harmful to the country. He did not see the subject of foreign policy apart from the difficult element of power; Instead, it meant diplomacy over nuclear power, missiles and deterrence. Harazi's view of foreign policy was a more scientific and realistic view of the JCPOA, which naively denies the principle of deterrence in foreign policy.

Don't boycott Khurzi! Padram Hosseini Yesterday, November 3, the Center for Advanced International Studies of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs hosted a conference to commemorate the slain Kamal Harazi; A conference where the prominent presence of JCPOA officials, especially Mohammad Javad Zarif, attracted attention. It is natural to talk about the background and character of a senior diplomat and martyr, but the problem starts from the point where Harazi's narrative is presented as if his intellectual geometry is aligned with the JCPOA process and his view on national security and deterrence. The question is clear: what is the connection between the view of Zarif, who sees nuclear weapons as uncharacteristic precisely in the days when the issue of nuclear deterrence is emphasized again in the world's strategic literature, and the positions of the slain Kamal Kharzi, who even before the start of the two wars put on the table the possibility of explicitly putting the possibility of changing the nuclear. Faced with an existential threat? The murdered Kamal Harazi declared several years ago and even before October 7, July 1401, in an interview with Al-Jazeera: "Iran has the technical ability to build a nuclear bomb and can even easily enrich it to 90%, but it has no decision to build it." This speech was not just an expression of technical ability; This was an introduction to a position that was more clearly expressed two years later. On May 10, 1403, this killer told Al-Jazeera Mubasher: "If Iran's existence is threatened, we will have to change our nuclear doctrine." He even emphasized that if Israel were to damage Iran's nuclear facilities, Iran's level of deterrence would be different; Because deterrence was defined at the accepted level until then. These things reveal the distance between the view of Horug Harazi as the foreign minister of the reformist government and the reformist and ambitious diplomats who are actually harmful to the country. He did not see the subject of foreign policy apart from the difficult element of power; Instead, it meant diplomacy over nuclear power, missiles and deterrence. Harazi's view of foreign policy was a more scientific and realistic view of the JCPOA, which naively denies the principle of deterrence in foreign policy.