June 29, 2025
By amarynth In Middle East - West Asia
Interview with Mohsen Rezaei, former IRGC Commander-in-Chief, on June 16, 2025, during the third day of the Iran-Israel War.
Translated by lecridespeuples for Resistance News Unfiltered
Mohsen Rezaei is an Iranian politician, military commander, and economist. He is best known for serving as the Commander-in-Chief of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from 1981 to 1997. Appointed at the age of 27, he led the IRGC through the critical years of the Iran–Iraq War (1980–1988). Rezaei holds a PhD in economics and later transitioned into politics. He served for over two decades as Secretary of the Expediency Discernment Council, an advisory body to the Supreme Leader that plays a key role in Iran’s strategic decision-making. Rezaei is considered a prominent figure within Iran’s conservative and military-political circles. In 2021, he was appointed Vice President for Economic Affairs in the administration of President Ebrahim Raisi.
Journalist: Peace be upon you, and may the mercy and blessings of God be upon you. We thank you for being with us on this program.
Mohsen Rezaei: May God reward you with goodness. In the name of God, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Allow me to begin with a few brief words addressed to our dear people.
First, I offer both congratulations and condolences: Congratulations on the great victories achieved by our noble people through the valor of their heroic sons in the armed forces. And condolences for the martyrdom of a number of senior commanders in our armed forces—for whom martyrdom was a long-cherished wish. I also extend my condolences to the innocent children, women, and men who were unjustly martyred.
On the other hand, I express my deepest thanks and appreciation to our honorable people, who, during this critical period, have stood firmly behind the armed forces, supporting them across all domains, and voicing their clear endorsement of the armed forces’ response through their presence in public demonstrations.
I especially thank His Eminence the Supreme Commander, who promptly issued the order for the armed forces to defend and respond. I am at your service. If you would like, we can begin by reviewing the background.
Journalist: Thank you very much. Yes. What is the history of our relationship with the Zionist entity? What have been the key moments in our confrontation with it so far? And in particular, what led to this latest round of escalation?
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes. As our people know well—especially analysts at home and abroad—since the triumph of the Revolution, we have been engaged in a continuous political confrontation with the Zionist entity. We have always believed that entering into a direct war with Israel would only be justified once the Islamic world stands united, when all Muslim countries come together as one to uproot this malignant tumor. Accordingly, we never believed it was right to go to war alone, without the support of other Islamic nations. Instead, we adopted a different strategy: to support the Palestinian people, standing by them when they are attacked, and when they fall unjustly as martyrs.
Even during the Israeli assault on Lebanon [in 1978 and 1982], we deployed a brigade—not to invade Palestinian land or to initiate a direct military confrontation with Israel, but to defend Lebanese territory. When the Syrian government asked us for assistance in the fight against ISIS, we answered the call, despite the fact that we were positioned very close to Haifa—only 50 to 60 kilometers away. Had we wanted to wage war on Israel at that time, we could have utterly destroyed both Tel Aviv and Haifa. But our conviction then, as now, was that Iran should not engage in a unilateral war with Israel.
Yet despite this restraint, it was Israel that initiated aggression against us. First, it attacked our consulate, resulting in the martyrdom of our dear brother, Mr. Zahdi. Then, when we responded, they assassinated Mr. Haniyeh inside Iran. And even after their repeated attacks following that, we halted True Promise 3 and opted for wisdom and self-restraint.
This demonstrates that from the very beginning of the Revolution until today—despite our slogans against Israel and our view of it as an occupying entity—we have consistently exercised restraint. However, over the past year or so, Israel has initiated a different kind of confrontation and engagement with us, culminating in recent days in what has become, in effect, a full-scale war.
Journalist: What is your assessment of Israel’s plan and objectives in this confrontation?
Mohsen Rezaei: In reality, Israel is implementing a multi-phase plan. The first phase was the assassination of our nuclear scientists. They had planned to carry out further assassinations of key figures inside Iran on the following Saturday, but our series of successive strikes thwarted their efforts. Nevertheless, they managed to target certain sites, including the Asalouyeh refinery. I will speak later about our proportional response to those attacks.
What we are facing today is an ongoing war, and it is expected to continue over the coming weeks. God willing, with another crushing defeat, they will be forced to retreat and withdraw.
Journalist: In your view, why did the United States approve Israel’s attack on the Islamic Republic?
Mohsen Rezaei: Some aspects of the American position—especially that of the Trump administration—remain unclear. However, what has become evident thus far is that Trump gave Netanyahu the green light to proceed with the attack. Statements made by Mr. Witkoff confirm this as well.
The reason is that, during the sixth round of negotiations, we were on the verge of presenting our plan. But before they had even reviewed its contents, they assumed we would insist on the issue of uranium enrichment, and so they told Israel: “You must act now.”
I believe the United States perceived us to be in a position of weakness, and believed that with a single blow, Israel could compel Iran to capitulate. Perhaps developments in Lebanon and Syria contributed to reinforcing this perception. However, what has become clear from this American escalation is that the Israeli attack had been premeditated—whether or not we entered into negotiations.
What is positive in all of this is that the political wisdom of the senior leadership—in particular, His Excellency the Supreme Leader’s decision to initiate negotiations—has exposed their true intentions to the world. Had we not entered into negotiations, they would have told the domestic public: “We wanted to reform the economy, and we aspired to attract $1 trillion in investments, but we were prevented from doing so.” Now, however, their cards have been laid bare. It is clear who seeks war—and who seeks peace.
They told the outside world that Iran was seeking to acquire the atomic bomb, and that this was the reason it refused to negotiate. But when the Leader of the Islamic Revolution demonstrated his far-sighted wisdom and said, “No, negotiate,” even if indirectly, the Iranian people came to understand that the true objective of the other side was to dismantle both the enrichment program and the missile program.
In fact, following those covert actions and in the wake of this military strike, it became clear that their ambitions extended beyond merely eliminating our missile and enrichment capabilities. They appeared to have further demands—namely, that in order to solidify their control over West Asia [the Middle East], they had to bring Iran into their fold. In their view, Iran must align itself with Israel and the United States so that they may dominate the region.
Journalist: Now, based on your experience during the eight years of the Holy Defense, how do you anticipate this confrontation will end?
Mohsen Rezaei: Let me begin by explaining when the idea of attacking Iran first took shape. About a month ago, amid the events unfolding in Gaza, I sensed—based on the shift in Israel’s behavior—that Gaza was merely the initial spark in a broader war that would eventually reach Iran. Roughly 25 days after Operation Al-Aqsa Flood, while Israel continued to bomb Gaza, its tanks had yet to enter. At that point, I foresaw the conflict expanding to Lebanon and Syria, before turning toward Iran—and possibly even extending, in a limited way, into Iraq. Why? Because Iran holds a position I describe as “the geography of the sword and the treasure.” It is akin to a strategic summit: when global powers ascend it, they wield a sword with which to settle scores with one another.
Consider the past two centuries. In earlier times, the British and the Tsars were vying for influence in Iran, and we were used as an instrument of reconciliation between them. Later, the Americans arrived and made our country a tool for accommodation with the Soviet Union. But since the victory of the Islamic Revolution, we have refused to let that sword fall into the hands of America—or anyone else. We have taken it up ourselves.
And as for why it is also a treasure: in addition to its vast mineral wealth, Iran grants whoever controls it command over the oil and gas of the north, the oil and gas of the south, and the country’s internal resources. That is why Iran is considered a global energy hub. To control Iran is to control the world’s energy supply.
Now that they have begun this new course of action, it is clear to me that the United States—driven by economic motives and seeking to settle its scores with China—is pushing this trajectory forward, from Gaza to Lebanon, then Syria, and ultimately Iran. In other words: why does Washington want Israel to launch the initial strike, only to intervene from behind? Because this is how it intends to impose the regimes it desires across the region—just as it did during the era of the Shah. Why? Because this is the path to salvaging its ailing economy.
I have written in two or three recent newspaper articles that the continuation of war is what guarantees the continued dominance of the U.S. dollar. At the same time, American intervention here would undermine China’s efforts to expand its meaningful presence in West Asia. In essence, over the next two decades, we risk being used once again—as a battleground for the settling of scores between America and China, only this time on Iranian soil. That is why this event, now unfolding, is of the utmost seriousness—for our people, our armed forces, and our government alike.
We must stand firm here. If not, we will once more be drawn into America’s conflicts with China and others—and we will never be able to progress or rise. Why? Because they do not want Iran for Iran’s sake, or for the sake of its people. They want it for entirely different purposes.
Journalist: Well then, in all seriousness—what is the future of this confrontation?
Mohsen Rezaei: We have no future without steadfastness, resistance, and decisive victory. It has been thirty-five years since the [Iran-Irak] war, and our country enjoys complete security and stability. Because we stood firm, resisted, and prevailed back then, we secured Iran’s national security for at least the next fifty years. That is why steadfastness is a duty, and defending our future is worth every sacrifice.
But if—God forbid—they succeed in their aims, Iran will face severe crises over the next ten to twenty years. This war is dangerous. I say it plainly: it is a dangerous war. Yet with God’s help, and through the sacrifices of our valiant armed forces, we will crush them once more on the soil of this homeland.
Journalist: Commander, what is your assessment of the balance of power between the two sides? What does Iran possess, and what does the Zionist entity possess?
Mohsen Rezaei: Look, we are still exercising restraint. That is, we have not yet employed all our capabilities. Why? Because we must win over global public opinion, and also the opinion of our own people.
Today, public sentiment is calling for retaliation—yes, it demands it. But it is also a trust, and we must act wisely. We have the capacity to carry out large-scale operations that would destabilize the entire region. And we may, in time, be compelled to move into new phases of confrontation.
Just as we began with the “True Promise,” you now see that we are using increasingly advanced weaponry—warheads with ever-greater destructive power. Just yesterday and today, we deployed missiles with warheads weighing one and a half tons. And we possess even more powerful ones, capable of causing massive devastation.
At the same time, we are closely observing the position of the Zionist entity’s backers. Will they step back or not? The wise figures in the U.S. and Europe must, as soon as possible, pull their leaders out from behind the Zionist entity.
If they do not, the battle will no longer be limited to arming Israel. Their aircraft—British, French, or American—will enter our skies and collide with our missiles. This would mark a more dangerous stage of war, and we are preparing for that. Yet we continue to strive never to be the ones who initiate—but we will be the ones who conclude.
In other words, if this support continues, the supporting parties may find themselves directly involved in the battle. I believe that is a very real possibility.
Journalist: And if that happens, do you believe the odds will be in our favor?
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes, absolutely. We have undisclosed tactics. We hold cards that have yet to be played. God willing, with His Help and Grace, we will continue to follow a policy of ambiguity—and we will catch them by surprise.
Journalist: Do you believe our armed forces have surprised the Zionist entity so far?
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes, yes! Just look at what the U.S. ambassador in Tel Aviv himself said: he said that during a single night, they had to take shelter in bunkers five times within a few hours! And their own statements say: “We have never seen a war like this in our history—on the soil of occupied Palestine. We never expected Iran to respond in this manner.”
And yet, we still have capabilities that remain unused. God willing, if they persist in their attacks, we will unveil them at the right moment.
Journalist: So, for now, we hold the upper hand.
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes—at this moment, we have the upper hand.
Journalist: We were discussing last night how the Zionist regime is deploying small drones to fly over Tehran and other areas.
Mohsen Rezaei: In fact, what happened yesterday and today was preceded by a breach two or three months ago: small drones were smuggled into the country—into forests, onto rooftops, even into Tehran itself. I urge the dear people of Tehran to check the roofs of their homes… They brought in various models of these drones and pre-positioned them. These are remotely activated aircraft, directed to strike specific targets.
However, according to the news I heard today, their supply of precision-guided bombs is very limited. They are now trying to manage the situation carefully to avoid depleting their ammunition. Their only real asset at this point is these so-called smart bombs.
That’s why they’ve had to resort to using these small aircraft—even though they’re still too afraid to send F-15s or other jets into Iranian airspace. They are compelled to launch their strikes from Iraqi airspace. At times, one, two, or even three F-35 aircraft enter and quickly exit our airspace.
Our armed defense forces, praise be to God, are solid and strong. We have managed the situation well so far, and the war is being conducted efficiently. There may come a time when we choose to cross the border—but that is another matter altogether. Since the outbreak of hostilities, however, we have proceeded step by step, with logic and deliberation.
Journalist: What do you mean by crossing the border?
Mohsen Rezaei: We may arrive at certain conclusions that necessitate specific actions.
Journalist: In any case, the tools you’ve mentioned—such as the small unmanned aerial vehicles deployed in various locations and activated remotely—must, by their very nature, be limited in capability. How could anyone imagine that with such limited resources, deep within a country of this vast expanse and this scale of missile arsenal, they would be able to sustain a confrontation?
Mohsen Rezaei: Our country, God willing, is spacious enough to contain twenty European nations. It is vast and sprawling. Therefore, the scale of the capabilities they are employing is extremely small—yes, very small. Much of it consists of spare parts assembled locally. That is, they conceal these components in vehicles, for example—just as they do in fuel and drug smuggling—since these are not large or obvious systems that can be directly targeted. Typically, some of these parts are transported to specific points, or remote areas like forests, and assembled on-site. From there, they’re moved in trucks or enclosed vehicles and installed elsewhere later.
Currently, the Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization is cooperating with them. Inside Iran, there is collaboration between this organization and such groups. Some of their operatives, who have received payments in U.S. dollars, are actively participating in these transportation operations.
Journalist: Then there’s the issue of the leadership vacuum the Zionist entity sought to create by assassinating leaders of the Revolutionary Guard, followed by subsequent operations. But what we witnessed instead was the strength of our armed forces: leadership positions were filled within just three to four hours, and the command structure was swiftly and efficiently reorganized. What did the people witness afterward? How do you assess the Zionist entity’s belief that creating a leadership vacuum would weaken you?
Mohsen Rezaei: I believe Israel made a grave military miscalculation. They assumed Iran was similar to Hezbollah, even though they themselves have failed to dismantle Hezbollah. They should have learned from that experience.
Look at the leadership figures that have emerged within our armed forces. Major General Pakpour, for example, is an exceptionally strong field commander—courageous, with a remarkable operational vision.
Amir Hatami, who joined from the regular army, is a brave and seasoned officer. The same goes for Mr. Mousavi in the aerospace sector. And also for Mr. Mousavi who succeeded the martyred General Bagheri in the General Staff—he is a dedicated man, aligned with the resistance movement.
Though they come from the regular army, there is full coordination between them and the Revolutionary Guards. What the enemy did failed to create any structural void within the armed forces. In fact, it could be said that certain aspects have grown more effective, as recent events have shown.
That’s one point.
Secondly, we now have no fewer than ten additional layers of trained commanders and officers—some from the generation that fought in the war, and others who gained valuable field experience in later years, particularly in the fight against ISIS. Many of our forces who fought in Iraq and Syria against ISIS have, through those field experiences, become akin to senior war commanders like Hussein Kharrazi and Ahmad Kazemi—young, capable leaders fully prepared to command the armed forces.
It was a profound error on the part of the Israeli military not to recognize the deep hierarchical structure and the robust bench of ready leadership within our ranks. This internal architecture and the organizational evolution of the armed forces entirely compensated for any potential gaps. In my view, this challenge has already been overcome. And in the near future, our dear people will see that those who have stepped into the shoes of our fallen leaders will ensure that no imbalance or vacuum arises in the management of the armed forces.
The high command—led by His Eminence, the Commander—is fully acquainted with each of these leaders. They have been selected with care and discernment. I am absolutely confident that there will be no void in leadership.
Journalist: In light of the current circumstances and the wartime situation we are going through, what should we expect from the people? What is expected from the political factions? And what is expected from the government? Please explain each of these separately.
Mohsen Rezaei: First of all, I would like to extend my sincere thanks once again. Our enemies believed that by igniting a war and launching strikes on specific sites, the people would distance themselves from the regime, and that political factions would begin trading accusations, with each blaming the other for what had happened.
But what we witnessed was that even opponents of the Islamic Republic—whether abroad or within the ranks of the opposition—indeed, even some who had previously been interviewed, declared: “I’ve been imprisoned three times so far, but today it is about Iran, and for me, this is Iran, and I would gladly give my life for it.”
Once again, the Iranian people have shown that they are the same people who brought about the revolution on the 22nd of Bahman (February 11, 1979, victory of the Islamic Revolution), who stood by the system, stood by Iran, and defended its national independence.
I want to stress this: just as our heroic defense against the brutal Iraqi army gave us 35 years of security, today we must face this ordeal with all the strength we possess—patiently, calmly, and with confidence. War, after all, is filled with developments and turns of fate. We strike, and they strike. But the most important thing is that we manage the coming weeks with cohesion, solidarity, and unity—all factions and all segments of the nation, God willing—with patience and steadfastness, hand in hand.
The enemy has also staked a great deal on this front: the stronger our national unity, the deeper its despair and frustration. It will know that Iran’s doors are shut to it. The door to repeating the Qajar and Pahlavi eras has been firmly closed. The Iranian people have come to know themselves and are now striving toward progress. They do not seek enrichment for war, but for development. They seek independence to safeguard their security.
So, God willing, we will emerge victorious from this war, and Iran will enjoy security for the next fifty years. I want to point out that, historically, Iran has faced a war roughly every 35 years. Look: from 1320 to 1359 (1941 to 1980) in the solar Hijri calendar—nearly forty years passed—then a war erupted. And now, 35 years later, another war has broken out.
What matters is that we emerge from the depths of these wars with our heads held high.
After the Iran-Iraq War, we emerged with our dignity intact, and we built our strength. I say to you, the Iranian people—based on my deep familiarity with the Iranian mujahideen, both during the era of the Sacred Defense and today—we will come out of this war many times stronger than we were before these recent events. There is absolutely no doubt about that.
The hidden potential of our youth will rise to the occasion with pride, and they will deliver to you an Iran greater than it was before this war, God willing. But the condition is synergy. The condition is solidarity.
Journalist: Sardar, some believe that the difficult economic situation may have become too heavy a burden for the people, and that they might be exhausted and unable to remain patient. What is your view?
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes, I agree. We have suffered—and continue to suffer—in Iran from inflation, and we face real economic challenges. We have been under severe economic sanctions for more than ten or fifteen years.
But it is victory that opens all doors. These same Americans, after your victory, will come to us humbled, pleading to be allowed—just like others—to come and invest here.
So our victory in this war is the gateway to wealth, to production, to openness. All doors will be opened to us. This war we are fighting now is merely a bottleneck, or a pivotal turning point on the path to the summit. It is the final obstacle we must overcome.
And when we reach the summit of this climb, I promise you—through our victory in this war—the doors of investment, of production, and all avenues of prosperity will be opened to our people.
Therefore, I ask you, as a soldier of this homeland, and I ask all political factions within this great Iranian nation, to continue standing behind your sons in the armed forces—in the Revolutionary Guard, in the army, in the security forces, and in the Basij—just as you have supported them until now. God willing, we will all overcome this trial with our heads held high.
Journalist: Once again, the enemies have made a grave miscalculation. They sought to sow division within Iranian society, perhaps imagining that in the event of war, polarization would emerge—with some supporting and others opposing the stance toward the Zionist entity. But the moment events unfolded, unity prevailed. Everyone, regardless of political affiliation, stood as one. The enemy likely did not expect such swift formation of national cohesion and solidarity.
Mohsen Rezaei: Yes, they had heard about internal discontent—about inflation, soaring prices, and other domestic issues. But they failed to understand the Iranian people. They did not grasp that this nation is capable of offering up four or five of its sons in sacrifice for Iran. They were ignorant of the character of this nation. The Iranian people stand by their homeland, rally behind Islam, defend their revolution, and are prepared to make great sacrifices.
Indeed, they thought that if they targeted our leaders and nuclear scientists, people would pour into the streets shouting, “Stop the war! Surrender! Do whatever America demands!” Yet why are we, on our part, optimistic? Look: America says, “Come to the negotiating table,” while at the same time ordering Israel to launch attacks. What does this tell us?
It tells us they do not count on Israel’s success. They are keeping the door to negotiations open so that, should Israel be defeated, they don’t walk away empty-handed. In fact, this contradiction itself—the US calling for negotiations while Israel strikes—is a sign of despair. They expect no good to come of this war, nor do they anticipate surviving it unscathed.
As for us, we cannot afford such duplicity, under any circumstances. Their aim is to later say: “Very well, let’s declare a ceasefire, then negotiate.” But how long would that ceasefire last? If Israel intends to strike Iran again in a few months, or to resume acts of sabotage down the line, we cannot allow Iran to become another prolonged quagmire—like Syria, lasting a year, two, five, or more. We must decisively put an end to these aggressions—with firmness, resolve, and full dedication—relying on the popular support that has coalesced behind our armed forces, so that, God willing, security and stability may prevail in our country for many years to come.
(since you obviously don't know)
