US Secretary of State Marco Rubio has said that talks are ongoing with Iran through mediators and that Washington will continue its military campaign until Tehran gives up its nuclear and missile programs.
He warned on Monday that the Strait of Hormuz would be kept open “one way or another” and that US war objectives could be achieved in “weeks, not months”.
Recommended Stories
2 item listend of list
He also said the United States would welcome political change in Iran if given the opportunity, but said it was not an official objective. Rubio criticized some NATO allies for denying access to US bases during the war and said Washington was closely monitoring developments in Cuba and Venezuela.
Here are highlights from Rubio’s exclusive interview with Al Jazeera’s Hashem Ahelbarra:
Marco Rubio says talks are underway with Iran
Most communication between Tehran and Washington is indirect and through intermediaries, but Rubio insisted that this continues.
He said that “there are messages and some direct talks going on between some people inside Iran and the United States, mainly through intermediaries”, adding that the US President “always prefers diplomacy, always prefers results”.
His comments come as US President Donald Trump has stepped up his rhetoric on social media and threatened to “destroy” Iran’s energy infrastructure if a ceasefire is not reached soon, Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett reported from Washington.
“Overall, Rubio’s statements and Trump’s posts suggest the US is pursuing a dual-track approach: keeping diplomatic channels open through intermediaries while simultaneously increasing military and economic pressure on Iran,” he said.
America demands that Iran give up nuclear and missile programs
Rubio said Iran should abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions and stop producing missiles and drones that could threaten Gulf region countries, and stressed that “the Iranian regime can never have nuclear weapons.”
He said Iran’s missile program poses a direct threat to countries across the Gulf, and claimed that “these short-range missiles that they are launching have only one purpose, and that is to attack Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates and Qatar and Kuwait and Bahrain.”
Rubio said Iran could pursue civilian nuclear energy, but not in a way that would allow it to quickly develop nuclear weapons.
“They don’t have a system that would allow them to quickly produce weapons,” he said. “They have to give up all these weapons programs and all their nuclear ambitions.”
However, Hassan Ahmadian, an assistant professor at the University of Tehran, questioned the statement that Iran poses an aggressive threat in the region.
“When did Iran attack its neighbors in the last three centuries?”. Ahmadian asked, arguing that Iran’s military strategy is shaped by deterrence in an asymmetric conflict.
“Why is he doing this now? Because he is the underdog in an asymmetric war and he wants to protect himself by expanding.”
Ahmadian said Iran has been the centerpiece of US policy for years.
He said, “With the outbreak of two wars in less than a year, we have experienced that Iran is at the negotiating table in different US administrations – all options are on the table.”
Strait of Hormuz to be kept open ‘one way or another’
Rubio said the US would not accept Iran’s claim of sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz and warned that the waterway would remain open despite Iran’s activities.
“Sovereignty over the Strait of Hormuz is not only not acceptable to us, it will also not be acceptable to the world.”
“This sets an incredible precedent…Nations can now occupy and claim international waterways as their own.”
“The Strait of Hormuz will remain open… it will remain open one way or another,” he said. He said that otherwise, Iran would “suffer real consequences” from the US and other countries.
Iranian analysts suggested that closing the strait was a temporary wartime measure and could be reversed after the conflict ended.
“It has been partially opened,” Ahmadian said, “I think there is no Iranian interest in not opening it beyond the war.”
“It’s an asymmetric way of putting pressure on the Americans, just like they’re bombing Iran, and so there would be no need for it after the war,” Ahmadian explained. “According to the Iranians, an arrangement will be made with the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council) countries to reopen it and see how things are managed.”
War objectives will be achieved ‘in weeks, not months’
Rubio said the US military campaign is progressing rapidly and outlined the military objectives Washington is trying to achieve.
“Those objectives are the destruction of their air force, which has been achieved, the destruction of their navy, which has largely been achieved.”
“A significant reduction in the number of missile launchers…and we’re going to destroy the factories that make those missiles and those drones.”
“We’re on track or ahead of schedule.”
“We will achieve them in weeks, not months.”
“It’s a matter of weeks. I won’t tell you exactly how many weeks, but it’s a matter of weeks, not months.”
Rubio says status of Iran’s new supreme leader uncertain
Asked by Al Jazeera about his views on Iran’s new supreme leader Mojtaba Khamenei, Rubio said his position was unclear.
“We don’t even know he’s in power. I know they say he’s in power. Nobody’s seen him. Nobody’s heard of him,” Rubio said.
“Right now it’s very opaque. It’s not at all clear how decisions are being made inside Iran.”
Iran’s leadership change is not the aim of the military operation
The US Secretary of State suggested that the US would welcome political change in Iran, although he said this was not the official objective of the military operation.
Rubio said, “We would always welcome a scenario in which Iran was led by people who had a different vision about the future.” “If that opportunity presents itself, we’re going to take it.”
He said the Iranian people “deserve better leadership” and indicated that Washington would not oppose it if there was a change of government.
Rubio said, “Do we think the people of Iran deserve better leadership than what they got from a clerical regime? One hundred percent.” “Would we be heartbroken if there was a change in leadership? Not at all.”
He also suggested that the United States would be willing to play a role if political change became possible.
“If there’s something we can do to facilitate it, would we be interested in participating? Of course.”
However, analysts said Washington’s position on regime change has changed over time.
Paul Musgrave, a professor of government at Qatar’s Georgetown University, told Al Jazeera: “Originally the goal was to topple the government; it’s leading to a steady decline.”
“And now we have President Donald Trump saying on Truth Social that he is in talks with elements of what could become a new regime, so there’s a lot of confusion here, but it’s no longer the number one goal. It’s not something they’re putting forward,” he said.
Rubio criticizes NATO allies and warns alliance could be reviewed
Rubio said some NATO countries refused to use U.S. airspace and bases during the conflict and suggested Washington may need to reevaluate the alliance after the war.
“We have NATO member states like Spain that we have promised to defend, refusing to let us use their airspace and bragging about it, refusing to let us use their bases.”
“And so you ask yourself, well, what’s in it for the United States?”
“If NATO is just about us protecting Europe from attack, but they’re denying us base rights when we need them, that’s not a very good arrangement.”
“All this has to be re-examined.”
