UNITED NATIONS, Sep 23 – Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian used his address to the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday to portray Iran as the victim of the nearly seven-month war with the United States and Israel, rejecting accusations that Tehran is responsible for terrorism and saying his country had acted in self-defense.
Pezeshkian’s appearance at the U.N. came at one of the most tense points in the conflict. He spoke a day after U.S. President Donald Trump warned that he could “annihilate” the Islamic Republic if Tehran failed to reach an agreement with Washington. The Iranian president responded by insisting that his government had not sought the confrontation.
“We have only defended ourselves. We are not terrorists,” Pezeshkian said during his speech.
He said Iranian civilians had been subjected to attacks and displayed photographs of former Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei along with images connected to more than 150 schoolchildren who, according to Iran, were killed during the opening days of the war.
“Our innocent people have been the targets of cowardly attacks and aggressions imposed upon our country,” Pezeshkian said. “And we defended ourselves with utmost strength. America and Israel attacked us.”
He also directly addressed the damage inflicted by the United States, saying Iran had refused to surrender despite the military pressure.
“Yes they did hit us, but we did not bend the knee,” he said.
The speech gave Pezeshkian a prominent international platform to present Tehran’s account of the conflict at a moment when diplomatic efforts have again begun to surface alongside military confrontation.
The Iranian president arrived in New York under tight security as the United States and Iran exchanged sharply different messages about the possibility of negotiations. Trump, speaking at the same General Assembly a day earlier, presented Tehran with a choice between reaching an agreement and facing further military action.
Yet behind the public threats, American and Iranian officials also made contact on the sidelines of the U.N. gathering.
Trump said Tuesday that his special envoy Steve Witkoff and his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, had held discussions with Iranian officials for roughly three hours. He described the meeting as “very good,” although he said the Iranian representatives were “not the highest level.”
The discussions were conducted indirectly through mediators, according to officials familiar with the contacts. Witkoff later said the sides had completed a lengthy round of discussions and expressed hope that the exchange could prove constructive.
The meeting represented an important diplomatic contact because direct efforts between Washington and Tehran had broken down after an earlier ceasefire collapsed. The two governments have remained sharply divided over the conditions required to end the war and resume broader negotiations.
Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei sought to play down the significance of the latest exchange. He said Tehran had not changed its basic negotiating position and continued to demand that Washington end its blockade of Iranian ports and release frozen Iranian assets.
Baghaei described the discussions, which took place through Qatari mediators, as “not anything new.”
The comments reflected the gap between Washington’s description of the discussions and Tehran’s effort to avoid suggesting that it had made concessions.
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio had said earlier Tuesday that Trump was open to meeting Pezeshkian while both leaders were in New York. Trump had also indicated before the General Assembly that he was considering a possible meeting with the Iranian president.
For now, however, the diplomatic contacts have not produced a publicly announced agreement, and major disagreements remain over the terms of any settlement.
One of the most immediate disputes concerns the Strait of Hormuz, the strategically important waterway through which a significant share of global energy shipments normally passes. Shipping through the strait has remained well below prewar levels as the conflict has disrupted commercial traffic and increased risks for vessels operating near Iran.
Iran has linked the reopening of the waterway to measures by Washington aimed at reducing military and economic pressure. Tehran has also demanded action concerning the blockade of Iranian ports and access to frozen financial assets.
The maritime situation has added an international economic dimension to the conflict, with governments and energy markets closely watching developments around the Gulf. Any sustained disruption to shipping through Hormuz could affect the movement of oil and other energy products far beyond the Middle East.
Pezeshkian’s speech also followed a long period of failed negotiations between Iran and the United States. Attempts to find a durable diplomatic arrangement have repeatedly stalled, with disputes over Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions, military activity and security guarantees continuing to prevent a lasting settlement.
The Iranian president has generally been regarded within Iran’s political system as more open to engagement with the West than some of the country’s hard-line political figures. His presence at the General Assembly therefore carried particular significance as Tehran weighs diplomacy while fighting a major war.
Iranian officials have nevertheless stressed that negotiations cannot take place while the country remains under military pressure.
Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said before Pezeshkian’s appearance that Tehran did not have confidence in the United Nations in its current form, arguing that the organization had failed to respond adequately to conflicts involving Iran and other parts of the region. He said Pezeshkian would use his U.N. appearance to defend what Tehran considers the rights and interests of the Iranian people.
The Iranian delegation’s position also reflects the broader political dispute over responsibility for the conflict. Washington has accused Tehran of destabilizing the region and has demanded restrictions on Iran’s nuclear capabilities and other activities. Tehran, meanwhile, has portrayed the U.S. and Israeli military campaign as an act of aggression against a sovereign state.
Pezeshkian repeated that argument before world leaders, framing Iran’s military response as a consequence of attacks against the country rather than the beginning of the conflict.
“Ladies and gentlemen, you all bore witness that this past June, my country was subjected to a savage aggression and flagrant contravention of the most elementary principles of international law,” he said, referring to the earlier phase of the conflict.
His latest remarks came as intermittent attacks and heightened military activity continued around the region, leaving diplomacy and confrontation unfolding at the same time.
The contrast between the public statements from Washington and Tehran was evident throughout the U.N. gathering. Trump has continued to threaten stronger action while saying a negotiated settlement remains possible. Iranian officials have maintained that diplomacy is possible but have demanded concrete steps from the United States before making significant concessions.
The exchange of messages leaves the two sides facing the same fundamental question: whether the renewed contacts in New York can develop into negotiations capable of ending the war, or whether military pressure will continue to define relations between Washington and Tehran.
For Pezeshkian, the U.N. address offered an opportunity to make Iran’s case directly to the international community. He used that opportunity to reject the characterization of Iran as a terrorist state and to argue that the country had been defending itself against attacks.
The speech did not resolve the differences between the two governments, but it underscored that even as Washington and Tehran explore another possible diplomatic opening, neither side has publicly abandoned its central demands.