US Airstrikes Continue for Fifth Day; Iran Vows Retaliation, Declares Accord Void
Translated from Korean, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- The United States conducted its fifth consecutive day of airstrikes against Iran, targeting coastal defense systems and military facilities.
- In response, Iran declared it no longer has a reason to adhere to a previous memorandum of understanding and vowed retaliation.
- Iran's Parliament Speaker suggested a dual approach of military response and diplomatic negotiation, emphasizing that any negotiation should be an extension of resistance for national interests.
The United States and Iran are locked in a fifth day of escalating military confrontation, with Washington continuing its airstrikes and Tehran vowing strong retaliation. The U.S. Central Command announced three separate strikes on Tuesday, targeting Iran's coastal defense systems, missile storage and launch facilities, and military installations near the Strait of Hormuz.
The memorandum of understanding is only meaningful if its provisions are valid and implemented. If we do not gain any benefit from the agreement, there is no reason to comply with it.
These strikes, which began on November 11, aim to neutralize Iran's naval attack capabilities. Reports indicate that the third strike on Tuesday reached deep into Iranian territory, with multiple explosions detected in areas known for missile bases. Air defense systems were reportedly activated in Tehran and near the Parchin military complex, a site suspected of nuclear activities.
Our military has complete freedom to respond to the enemy's aggression.
In response to the sustained U.S. pressure, Iran has declared its previous memorandum of understanding with the U.S. invalid. Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, stated that the memorandum is meaningless if it yields no benefits and that Iran has complete freedom to respond to aggression. He also indicated a strategic approach that combines military action with diplomatic engagement, framing negotiations as an extension of resistance to protect national interests.
Iran must harmoniously utilize both military and diplomatic cards. There is no need to fear war or negotiation. Negotiations at this point are not a compromise, but an extension of the resistance strategy and a means of protecting national interests.
Esmaeil Baghaei, spokesperson for Iran's Foreign Ministry, echoed this sentiment, stating that while no negotiations with the U.S. are currently planned, Iran will cease its obligations if the other party breaks its promises. This exchange highlights the heightened tensions and the complex interplay of military and diplomatic strategies between the two nations.
We are not planning any negotiations with the United States at the moment and are focusing solely on national defense. However, the agreement must be based on mutual fulfillment of obligations, so if the other party breaks its promises, Iran will also cease its obligations.
Originally published by Hankyoreh in Korean. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.