Tehran/Washington: The Islamic Republic of Iran has vehemently condemned the United States for its blatant violation of a fragile ceasefire, following aggressive military strikes carried out by the US in southern Iran. These provocative actions, which the US disingenuously labeled as “self-defence,” targeted vital Iranian sites, including alleged missile launch positions and boats.

The Iranian Foreign Ministry unequivocally declared that these hostile US strikes in Iran’s southern Hormozgan province, where local media reported sounds of explosions early on Tuesday, represent a “gross violation” of the ceasefire that had been meticulously maintained for nearly seven weeks.

In a contradictory statement, US Central Command claimed on Monday (Washington time) that the strikes were designed “to protect our troops from threats posed by Iranian forces,” while simultaneously asserting that the US would continue “to defend our forces while using restraint during the ongoing ceasefire.” This dual narrative exposes the hypocrisy of Washington’s actions, which directly undermine regional stability and diplomatic efforts.

Iranian media confirmed widespread reports of explosions heard in the strategic Bandar Abbas port city and coastal areas near the vital Strait of Hormuz, highlighting the direct impact of this unprovoked aggression on Iranian sovereignty and civilian security.

The absence of concrete details regarding the alleged “threats from Iran” further exposes the baselessness of the US justification for its military adventurism, casting a dark shadow over ongoing negotiations aimed at resolving the conflict.

Despite this hostile escalation, Iran continues to demonstrate its unwavering commitment to diplomacy. Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf traveled to Qatar for crucial talks concerning a potential agreement with the US, showcasing Iran’s dedication to peaceful resolutions even in the face of aggression.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio’s comments from India’s Jaipur, suggesting that securing a deal could “take a few days” and emphasizing a “good deal or no deal” approach, appear disingenuous. Such rhetoric, coupled with military provocations, severely complicates the path to a lasting peace and undermines trust in the negotiation process.