Baqaei’s Briefing: A Negotiation Process Shadowed by Ships and Strikes

ERBIL (Kurdistan24) - The Iranian Ministry of Foreign Affairs announced on Monday that Tehran has not yet decided whether to participate in a second round of regional negotiations, citing alleged United States ceasefire violations and escalating maritime hostilities.

From the podium of the Foreign Ministry in Tehran on Monday, spokesperson Esmaeil Baqaei addressed domestic and international media, detailing the government’s diplomatic posture following a period of intense regional military escalation.

Baqaei articulated Iran's hesitation to commit to a second round of formal talks, centering his address on a series of alleged maritime and territorial infractions by Washington that he claimed actively undermine the current diplomatic framework.

Baqaei’s announcement underscores the extreme fragility of the diplomatic structures established since the February 28 outbreak of direct regional conflict.

By publicly conditioning further negotiations on U.S. compliance with existing ceasefire terms, Tehran is leveraging diplomatic participation to address ongoing military operations in the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz. 

This linkage indicates that the current cessation of hostilities remains vulnerable; a stall in the diplomatic track could unravel the temporary truce, raising the prospect of renewed military confrontation between Iranian forces and U.S. or Israeli coalitions.

According to the spokesperson, the deterioration of security in the Persian Gulf and the strategic Strait of Hormuz is the direct result of U.S. and Israeli military activities.

The Strait of Hormuz, a narrow maritime chokepoint connecting the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman, serves as a critical artery for global energy markets, processing approximately a fifth of the world's daily oil consumption. 

Baqaei stated that the maritime corridor had maintained "total security" prior to the Feb. 28 escalation, asserting that the international community must hold Washington and Israel accountable for regional destabilization rather than switching the roles of "perpetrator" and "victim."

Baqaei outlined specific grievances against the United States, accusing Washington of adopting contradictory behavior and continuously violating the clauses of the existing ceasefire.

Among the alleged infractions, the spokesperson cited U.S. non-compliance with agreements concerning Lebanon, an attempted maritime blockade of Iran, and a direct attack on an Iranian commercial vessel.

He characterized these actions as "clear examples of acts of aggression" under United Nations resolutions, though he did not specify which resolutions or provide precise dates for the maritime incidents.

The explicit mention of Lebanon in Baqaei's address highlights the interconnected nature of the current regional security environment.

By linking the bilateral negotiation framework to specific agreements in the Levant, Tehran is emphasizing its broader strategic alignment. The alleged U.S. failure to uphold these parallel agreements, according to Iran, directly degrades trust in the primary bilateral negotiations.

U.S. and Israeli officials were not immediately available for comment on Monday regarding the specific allegations of ceasefire violations, the attempted maritime blockade, or the reported attack on the commercial vessel.

The press conference also provided new details regarding the structural framework of the recent diplomatic engagements.

Baqaei confirmed that the United States had previously submitted a 15-point plan, to which Iran responded with a 10-point proposal.

According to the spokesperson, these competing frameworks were subjected to detailed negotiations in Islamabad, Pakistan—a location frequently utilized for indirect regional diplomacy—followed by a mediation visit by international envoys to Tehran.

This exchange ultimately generated what Baqaei described as a "specific package" for de-escalation.

Despite the existence of this structured diplomatic pathway, Baqaei emphasized historical grievances as a barrier to continued dialogue.

He alleged that over the past nine months, the U.S. has conducted two attacks on Iranian territory during periods of active negotiation, actions he claimed violated international law, resulted in casualties, and damaged national assets.

“This clear and obvious contradiction between words and behavior increases the Iranian nation's suspicion regarding U.S. intentions,” Baqaei said, concluding that Iran will evaluate the continuation of negotiations based strictly on its national interests.

The formulation of competing 15-point and 10-point plans suggests a highly formalized, albeit contested, diplomatic channel exists to manage the crisis.

However, the Iranian foreign ministry's statements highlight a critical structural vulnerability: the synchronization of high-level diplomatic agreements with immediate kinetic realities on the ground and at sea.

By insisting on unalterable "red lines" and dismissing media reports regarding negotiation details as "rumors," Tehran is signaling a hardened negotiating posture designed to limit the flexibility of future talks.

As the current diplomatic pause holds, the immediate trajectory of the negotiated "specific package" remains unresolved.

The lack of a firm commitment from Tehran regarding a second round of negotiations leaves the institutional framework of the ceasefire in a state of uncertainty, pending further diplomatic maneuvering or shifts in the maritime security environment of the Persian Gulf.