Iran’s Pezeshkian supports US dialogue but firmly rejects surrender.
Renewed tensions raise concerns over the future of US-Iran negotiations amid growing uncertainty surrounding diplomatic efforts.
- Pezeshkian supports dialogue but rejects surrender, coercion and pressure from abroad completely.
- Iran will honour the MoU while the United States fulfils its commitments.
- Tehran may stop following the agreement if Washington violates its promises.
- The president has denied rumours that he plans to resign from office.
- Internal divisions reportedly surround the agreement and its diplomatic consequences.
- The June MoU established a 60-day timetable for negotiations on a final deal.
- Explosions were reported on Qeshm Island near the strategic Strait of Hormuz.
- Authorities are investigating while uncertainty threatens diplomacy, shipping and regional stability for all sides.
Iran Signals Resolve and Openness to Dialogue
Tehran: Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has sent a message to his supporters and negotiators: Iran is willing to talk, but it will not surrender under pressure. In an interview published by his office, the president defended the decision to negotiate with the United States and sign a memorandum of understanding aimed at ending the war.
Pezeshkian said Tehran would continue honouring its commitments as long as Washington also fulfilled its promises under the agreement. His warning was direct: if the United States breaks its side of the understanding, Iran will no longer consider itself bound to continue. The statement reflects the mistrust that has shaped relations between the two countries for decades.
Diplomacy is not viewed as a sign of weakness. It is being presented as a way to protect national rights, reduce pressure on ordinary people and prevent another devastating conflict. At the same time, Pezeshkian’s insistence that Iran will not be forced to surrender appears designed to reassure critics who fear that negotiations could compromise the country’s sovereignty.
The president’s comments come at a politically sensitive moment. Earlier in the week, he rejected rumours that he was preparing to step down, saying he would continue his work resolutely. Reports of divisions within Iran’s leadership had intensified over the memorandum, with hardliners questioning whether the government had made too many concessions.
In June, Iran and the United States signed the MoU with a plan to hold negotiations within 60 days and work towards a final agreement. The document was intended to create a framework for ending hostilities and reopening a diplomatic path. However, renewed tensions have made the future of those talks uncertain. The agreement now appears to depend heavily on whether both sides can maintain restraint.
The atmosphere became even more fragile after explosions were heard on Qeshm Island in Hormozgan province. The island lies near the entrance to the Strait of Hormuz, one of the world’s most important waterways for energy shipments. Iran’s semi-official Tasnim news agency said the blasts were connected to the armed forces’ confrontation with hostile targets.
According to reports, the explosions occurred at about 9:40 p.m. local time on Thursday. Tasnim said Iranian naval forces would announce details of their reported achievements in the following hours. The account raised concern because any military activity near the Strait of Hormuz can have consequences far beyond Iran’s borders, affecting shipping, energy markets and security.
Yet local officials urged caution. Ahmad Nafisi, Hormozgan’s deputy governor, said no strike or incident had been reported on Qeshm Island or in Bandar Abbas. Authorities were investigating the cause of the explosions. That difference between military-linked reports and official reassurance illustrates how quickly uncertainty can spread during a tense standoff.
Pezeshkian’s message therefore carries two meanings. Iran wants a diplomatic exit, but it also wants to show that talks will take place from a position of dignity. Whether the MoU survives will depend on trust, communication and the willingness of Washington and Tehran to avoid actions that could turn suspicion into conflict.