'Iran Has Never Shied Away from Talks,' Pezeshkian; Rejects Direct Dialogue

By Kamaran Aziz

ERBIL (Kurdistan24) — Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian confirmed on Sunday that Tehran has formally responded to a letter sent earlier this month by U.S. President Donald Trump, but firmly ruled out any prospect of direct negotiations. Instead, he signaled that indirect diplomatic channels remain open, contingent on the United States’ behavior and its ability to rebuild trust.

Speaking during a televised cabinet meeting, Pezeshkian stated that Iran’s response was delivered through the sultanate of Oman, and underscored that it was America’s history of broken promises that had eroded confidence between the two sides. “Iran has never shied away from negotiations,” he said. “It is only the broken promises by the other side that have damaged trust, which must be restored.”

The Iranian president made clear that while Tehran remains open to indirect diplomacy, it rejects direct talks outright under the current conditions. “It’s the behavior of the Americans that will determine the continuation of the negotiation process,” Pezeshkian added. The statement marks Iran’s first official response to Trump’s March 12 letter, which was delivered via an emissary from the United Arab Emirates and urged Tehran to return to the negotiating table, warning of possible military action if it refused.

The rejection of direct dialogue highlights how far relations have deteriorated since Trump’s withdrawal from the 2015 nuclear deal in 2018, a move that reimposed sweeping sanctions and sparked a prolonged period of regional escalation. Since then, diplomatic efforts have repeatedly stalled, and Iran has incrementally rolled back its nuclear commitments, enriching uranium to near weapons-grade levels.

Pezeshkian’s statement comes amid mounting tensions throughout the Middle East. Regional conflicts—from Israel’s war with Hamas in Gaza to U.S. airstrikes on Iranian-backed Houthi forces in Yemen—have intensified fears of a wider confrontation. Iranian officials have continued to express opposition to American pressure and threats, demanding negotiations be grounded in mutual respect.

The White House has yet to formally respond to Iran’s latest announcement. Trump's letter, while vague in detail, recalled his earlier diplomatic gambits with North Korea's Kim Jong Un, which produced historic meetings but no binding agreements.

Pezeshkian’s recent hardening of rhetoric is also shaped by domestic shifts. Elected on a moderate platform pledging engagement with the West, his tone has shifted in response to recent pressure from Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who in February condemned talks with the U.S. as “unwise and dishonorable.”

Since then, Pezeshkian has realigned his language more closely with Iran’s hardline establishment.

Meanwhile, Iran has been sending mixed signals for weeks. During Friday’s Quds Day demonstrations, videos showed organizers directing participants to chant only “Death to Israel!”—a departure from the usual inclusion of “Death to America” in the slogans.

In another symbolic gesture, a recently unveiled underground missile base featured Revolutionary Guard troops stepping on an Israeli flag—conspicuously omitting the American flag, often included in such displays.

Still, tensions remain high. Press TV, Iran’s English-language state broadcaster, recently published a list of potential U.S. targets in the region, including Camp Thunder Cove on Diego Garcia, a key American airbase housing stealth B-2 bombers.

Read More: Tehran Warns: Diego Garcia ‘In Crosshairs’ If U.S. Strikes

Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf warned on Friday that any violation of Iran’s sovereignty would ignite the region. “It will be like a spark in a gunpowder depot,” he said, “and their bases and their allies will not be safe.”

In a further show of force, Tehran recently unveiled footage of a vast underground missile facility—part of what analysts refer to as Iran’s “missile cities.” These fortified sites, housing medium- and long-range ballistic missiles capable of striking targets across the region, are a central component of Iran’s deterrence strategy. The move was widely interpreted as a signal to Washington and its allies that Iran retains the capacity to absorb an initial strike and respond with significant force.

Former U.S. diplomat Zalmay Khalilzad commented on the development, warning that while the show of strength may serve as a deterrent, Iran’s ability to maintain effective command and control in a wartime scenario remains questionable.

“I would advise Iran not to gamble on war,” he said, urging the Islamic Republic to consider negotiations as a safer alternative. Khalilzad’s remarks reflect broader U.S. skepticism over Tehran’s growing missile capabilities, which have been cited by the Trump administration as key justifications for its continued campaign of economic and military pressure.

Read More: Zalmay Khalilzad Warns Iran: Underground Missile Bases Won't Ensure Survival in War

The Trump administration has taken a particularly hard line on Iran’s ballistic missile program, accusing it of violating U.N. Security Council resolutions and threatening regional stability. Unlike the previous U.S. administration, which pursued engagement through the 2015 nuclear deal, President Trump’s strategy has centered on deterrence and coercion—seeking to curtail not only Iran’s nuclear ambitions but also its regional influence through missile development and proxy forces.

Despite the aggressive rhetoric, the Associated Press reported that Iran’s two missile and drone attacks on Israel in April and October 2024 caused little damage, and were met with forceful Israeli retaliation, including the destruction of key air defense systems within Iran.

As for the nuclear issue, the United Nations’ nuclear watchdog reported in February that Iran had increased production of uranium enriched up to 60% purity—just short of weapons-grade. Though Iran insists its program is peaceful, Western powers remain skeptical amid repeated threats from officials suggesting a pivot toward weaponization.

Pezeshkian also used his cabinet address to condemn what he described as “catastrophic crimes” committed by the Israeli regime in Gaza. He accused Israel of violating the ceasefire by bombing civilian areas and called on the international community to take decisive action.

While Iran’s refusal of direct talks poses a significant obstacle to diplomatic progress, the acknowledgment of Trump’s letter and continued Omani mediation suggest that backchannel negotiations remain possible. As regional tensions escalate and nuclear risks grow, indirect diplomacy may offer the only viable path to avoiding further conflict.

Whether this exchange marks a prelude to revived talks or yet another missed opportunity depends, as Pezeshkian stressed, on whether the U.S. alters its behavior and abandons what Tehran views as coercive diplomacy.