WANA (May 13) – A member of the Iranian negotiating team has revealed specific details regarding the negotiation process between Iran and the United States in Pakistan, describing the conduct of Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf during the talks.

 

Seyed Mahmoud Nabavian highlighted the four negotiation sessions held in Islamabad, noting that in the first session, JD Vance stated the United States had two main demands: the full reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the removal of all 60% enriched materials from Iran.

 

Clash Over Priorities

The Iranian delegation responded by emphasizing the lifting of sanctions and the recognition of Iran’s enrichment rights. When Vance requested that the Strait of Hormuz issue be addressed first, Ghalibaf reacted by stating that they did not have a single issue to resolve first, as there were four issues on the table.

 

Deterrence and Infrastructure

Nabavian mentioned a meeting between Ghalibaf and Asim Munir, the Chief of Army Staff of Pakistan, prior to the meeting with Vance. He noted that while he had criticisms of the negotiations in principle, Ghalibaf’s presence was “fairly effective”.

 

Regarding the suggestion that the U.S. could destroy Iranian infrastructure, Ghalibaf emphasized that while the U.S. had the ability to strike Iran’s infrastructure, Iran could “level all regional infrastructure to the ground in less than half a day”.

 

Dispute Over Frozen Assets

In the second session, the parties agreed to follow the details under four main axes. The Americans proposed that in exchange for Iran’s cooperation on the Strait of Hormuz and the removal of enriched materials, $6 billion of frozen assets would be released.

 

Nabavian stated that Vance spoke about the amount of Iran’s assets in a “humiliating tone,” to which Ghalibaf immediately responded: “Whether our money is one dollar or one hundred billion dollars, it belongs to the Iranian nation, and no one has the right to interfere in it”.

 

The Breakdown of the Proposal

During the third session, Vance suggested continuing the talks based on a U.S.-presented plan after contacting Donald Trump, a proposal Ghalibaf accepted for review. Nabavian emphasized that Ghalibaf’s style was neither to reject the principle of dialogue entirely nor to yield to an agreement at any cost.

 

However, as the views of both sides grew closer, Vance suddenly announced that Trump would not accept the agreement. When Ghalibaf pointed out that the plan was the Americans’ own proposal, Vance claimed the plan actually belonged to Asim Munir. Nabavian added that this issue proved the United States had fundamentally not entered the negotiations to reach a deal.

 

Standing Against Threats

The Vice Chairman of the National Security and Foreign Policy Commission concluded by emphasizing that Vance resorted to threats several times during the negotiations. He stated that Ghalibaf stood firm against him and did not allow the path of the negotiations to be altered by threats.