Iran's foreign minister tells UK that letting US strike Iran from British bases would be an 'act of aggression'
The Facts
- Araghchi spoke by telephone with British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband on Friday about regional developments and bilateral relations; Iran's foreign ministry issued a statement on the call the following day.
- Araghchi said any cooperation with what he called the "aggressors" — including under the pretext of existing "defence agreements" — is "unacceptable" to Tehran.
- He argued that, under international law and the Definition of Aggression resolution, allowing an aggressor state to use a country's territory, bases or facilities for an unlawful attack on another country constitutes an act of aggression and entitles the attacked country to resort to self-defence.
- Araghchi criticised British policy toward Iran as "unjustified," citing London's designation of Iran's armed forces, including the Islamic Revolution Guard Corps, as a national security threat, and alleging British complicity in two wars waged by the United States and Israel against Iran.
- Araghchi said Iran had entered the diplomatic process in good faith and reached a ceasefire memorandum with the United States on June 18, and accused Washington of subsequently violating its commitments.
- British Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband responded that Britain is not at war with Iran and said diplomacy is the way to resolve disputes and reduce tensions.
- In separate calls with Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, Pakistan's army chief Asim Munir and Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan, Araghchi warned against any "adventurous action" by the United States and said aggression by the US or Israel, or participation by regional countries, would meet a "decisive response."
- Iranian officials have signalled escalation options tied to the dispute: Tasnim reported Tehran has an "extensive" plan ready to respond to attacks on its infrastructure, with warnings that continued US action could affect the Strait of Hormuz, while Araghchi said Iran is consulting Oman on a mechanism for regulating navigation in the waterway.
Context
Which British facilities are at issue, and has the UK confirmed granting access?
One report says UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham approved continued US access to Diego Garcia and RAF Fairford for operations described as defensive newKerala.com. That specific detail appears in a single source in this pool and is not independently corroborated here. What the UK has said publicly through Miliband is that Britain is not at war with Iran and favours diplomacy newKerala.com,newKerala.com.
What legal argument is Tehran making?
Araghchi invoked international law and the UN Definition of Aggression resolution, saying that permitting an aggressor party to use a country's territory, bases or facilities to launch an unlawful attack on another country is itself an act of aggression — and that this gives the country under attack grounds to exercise the right of self-defence Times of India,Asian News Internat…,خبرگزاری صد…,PressTV. He added that pre-existing defence agreements do not, in Tehran's view, provide cover for such cooperation Mehr News Agency,english.news.cn.
What is the state of US–Iran diplomacy behind this?
Araghchi referenced a ceasefire memorandum reached on June 18 — described elsewhere as the Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding between the US and Iran — and said Washington has since broken its commitments Mehr News Agency,Trend,AzerNews. Iranian accounts allege continued strikes, port blockades and economic pressure since the memorandum newKerala.com, and reports cite US media saying President Trump ordered a fresh military attack on Iran newKerala.com. These characterisations come from Iranian officials and Iranian state or semi-official outlets; no US or UK confirmation appears in this source pool.
Where Left and Right agree, and where they split
- Where Left and Right agree
- Araghchi's warning puts real weight on how British bases are used, and both readings treat Miliband's answer — not at war, diplomacy over escalation — as the correct one.
- Where Left and Right split
- Britain refusing to be dragged into a war it never declared, or Tehran claiming a veto over who London lets use its bases.
How left and right read it
A June 18 ceasefire memorandum with Washington, which Araghchi says Washington then violated, is now the backdrop to warnings that British bases could make Britain a party to attack. Miliband's answer — Britain is not at war, diplomacy is the route — is the right one, and it has to bind. Basing rights are not a blank cheque. Hormuz warnings and "decisive response" talk are the price ordinary people pay when broken commitments substitute for negotiation.
Araghchi telephoned Ed Miliband on Friday to say that cooperation with Washington, including under existing defence agreements, is unacceptable to Tehran, and that hosting an aggressor's forces would itself be aggression. He pressed the same warning on Turkish, Pakistani and Saudi officials, promising a decisive response to any participation. That is a claimed veto over other nations' alliances. Who decides how British bases are used — London, or Tehran?
The receipts — all 20 sources
Independent coverage (20)
Facts first. Then every angle.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief — the facts everyone agrees on, then the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.