Ghalibaf Accuses Washington of Bad Faith in Negotiations
Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warned that Tehran must remain ready for military conflict even as it engages in negotiations with the United States, accusing Washington of repeatedly breaking its promises. Speaking in a televised address, Ghalibaf emphasized that Iran’s primary concern is preventing the U. S. from exploiting diplomatic talks to weaken the country’s position, insisting that trust cannot be placed in American commitments given their history of reneging on agreements. He stated that while diplomacy continues, national defense readiness is non-negotiable to safeguard sovereignty and deter potential aggression.
Latest news
TSMC Surpasses Expectations with Record Profit in Third Quarter
India's IDBI Bank Shares Drop 7% After Government Announces $5.5 Billion Stake Sale to Fairfax
UK Economy Grows Slightly in August Despite Cost-of-Living Pressures
G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bankers Convene in Thailand Amid Iran Conflict FalloutGhalibaf directly criticized U. S. conduct in negotiations, claiming American officials make promises during talks only to abandon or violate them afterward. He referenced past instances where the U. S. withdrew from agreements or imposed new sanctions despite assurances, arguing this pattern undermines any credibility in current discussions. The speaker stressed that Iran’s leadership is not opposed to dialogue but refuses to disarm its defenses while facing what he described as unreliable partners. His remarks reflect growing frustration among hardliners who believe concessions have only led to increased pressure from Washington.
How Is Iran Balancing Diplomacy and Military Readiness?
Iran maintains that its nuclear program remains peaceful and within the bounds of international agreements, yet it has steadily increased uranium enrichment levels in response to stalled talks and renewed sanctions. Ghalibaf affirmed that strengthening military capabilities, including missile development and defensive systems, proceeds alongside diplomatic channels. He argued that a strong defense posture actually supports negotiations by ensuring Iran cannot be coerced into unfavorable terms. This dual-track approach aims to project resilience while leaving room for dialogue, though critics warn it risks escalating tensions further.
Frequently Asked Questions
Why does Ghalibaf say Iran must prepare for war despite negotiations? He argues that the U. S. has a history of breaking promises in negotiations, so Iran must maintain military readiness to protect itself from potential betrayal or aggression during talks.
What specific actions has the U. S. taken that Ghalibaf cites as broken promises? He pointed to past U. S. withdrawals from agreements and the imposition of new sanctions after assurances, which he says demonstrate a pattern of bad faith in diplomatic engagements with Iran.
