Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi asserted that Iran’s defiance of U.S. pressure over its nuclear program stems from its national identity, following a query from U.S. envoy Steve Witkoff about why Tehran hadn’t yielded. The statement underscores Iran’s view of itself as a historic power deserving of respect, distinct from other regional states.
National pride and sovereignty
For Tehran, the nuclear program is intrinsically linked to its identity as a modern nation. Iran, with a population of 92 million and a 2,500-year-old civilization, views itself as a major power historically rivaling ancient Greece and Rome.
Despite being governed by clerics since 1979, Iran frequently utilizes nationalistic symbols and references its pre-Islamic past alongside its revolutionary identity. State ideology blends Shiite principles with pride in Persian scientific, cultural, and imperial achievements.
The nuclear program, initially developed with U.S. assistance, has existed for decades with limited international concern until recently. Mastering nuclear technology is therefore seen not merely as a technical feat, but as proof of Iran’s sovereignty and advancement to the level of global powers.
“Tehran’s nuclear program now functions as a structural pillar of the Islamic Republic – particularly in demonstrating indigenous scientific and technological capability under pressure,” said Danny Citrinowicz, senior researcher in the Iran and the Shiite Axis Program at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, Israel.
“As a result, relinquishing the nuclear program would not be viewed merely as a policy concession; it would be perceived domestically as surrendering one of the regime’s foundational achievements.”
The regime’s hardliners have repeatedly warned that abandoning uranium enrichment would constitute national humiliation.
“If Iran abandoned enrichment entirely, hardliners would likely frame it as surrender, especially if sanctions relief were limited,” said Sanam Vakil, director of the Middle East and North Africa Program at the Chatham House think tank in London. The regime could accept a compromise on its nuclear program short of giving up enrichment, “but only if it delivers clear economic or strategic gains.”
Despite a recent U.S. military buildup around Iran and warnings against enrichment, Tehran has maintained its position. It has refused to offer concessions beyond those made during the 2015 nuclear agreement – from which the U.S. withdrew in 2018 – and is now seeking broader relief from U.S. sanctions, not just those related to the nuclear program.
Iran has also rejected American efforts to expand negotiations to include its ballistic missile program and support for armed groups across the Middle East.
Deterrence and leverage
Despite concerns about Iran’s nuclear activities shortening its path to a bomb, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has issued a religious edict vowing never to pursue a nuclear weapon.
However, even if sincere, enrichment provides Iran with strategic leverage as a nuclear threshold state – possessing the capability and infrastructure to build a weapon if it chooses. Tehran believes its ability to change course quickly deters coercion or attack.
Iran demonstrated this leverage after the U.S. withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear agreement, gradually enriching uranium to levels exceeding those required for civilian power generation. This signaled to Washington that the 2015 deal provided internationally verifiable limits, and without it, those limits no longer applied.
That strategy appeared to backfire, prompting a surprise Israeli attack in June 2025 and the first direct American military strikes on Iranian territory. By the time of the strikes, Iran was the only country without an active nuclear weapons program to have enriched uranium to 60%, just short of weapons-grade.
“The 12-day summer war likely forced Tehran to reassess this assumption,” said Citrinowicz. “The scale and precision of US and Israeli strikes demonstrated that threshold status does not immunize Iran from military action.”
Still, Tehran is unlikely to abandon its nuclear program, Citrinowicz said, believing that doing so would expose Iran to future coercion and potential attack.
Discover more from Archyworldys
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
