Iranian President
Masoud Pezeshkian has called for an end to the months-long war with the United States, saying Tehran is in a position of strength and dignity even as diplomatic efforts remain stalled.
“It is better that we bring the war to an end now as we are in a position of power and dignity,” Pezeshkian said during a meeting with doctors on Friday, according to Al Jazeera.
Pezeshkian said the world recognised what he described as Iran's victory and accused the United States of attacking Iranian schools, hospitals and infrastructure.
“The whole world acknowledges our victory and emphasises that America has attacked our schools, hospitals and infrastructure in violation of all regulations and is hated around the world,” he said.
The Iranian president's remarks came days after a memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington expired, with no clear breakthrough in diplomatic efforts to end the conflict.
Pezeshkian defends US deal as Iran’s military warns of retaliation
Pezeshkian also defended the June memorandum of understanding with Washington against criticism from hardliners in Iran's parliament, who had accused his administration of making concessions to the US.
“They cannot find even a single clause in this agreement that indicates capitulation.
All the commitments concern the other side,” he said.
However, Iran's military leadership has continued to signal readiness for further conflict.
Major-General Ali Abdollahi, chief of staff of Iran's armed forces, was quoted by Iranian media as saying the country's forces would respond to new threats.
“With preparedness across land, sea, air, air defence and cyberspace, Iran’s armed forces will respond to the enemy’s new threats with crushing, punishing and devastating responses,” Abdollahi said.
IRGC chief Ahmad Vahidi also said Iran had created a “solid defensive shield” against threats and called continuation of its “Strategy of Defensive and Offensive Empowerment” the only “intelligent and efficient solution”, as reported by Al Jazeera.
Meanwhile, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf has acknowledged the pressure on the country's economy.
“No matter how much military power we have, we won't survive if people are hungry and we don't have financial turnover, economic growth and national production,” he said, according to Iran's official IRNA news agency, as cited by Reuters.
Oman, Iran discuss resuming talks as Hormuz remains flashpoint
Omani and Iranian foreign ministers discussed ways to create conditions for resuming dialogue and negotiations during a phone call on Friday, according to Oman's state news agency. They also discussed developments affecting navigation in the Strait of Hormuz, according to Al Jazeera.
The waterway remains at the centre of the confrontation. Iran has kept the strait partially shut while the US maintains a naval counterblockade.
Traffic through the strait has been severely disrupted, with only four commodity ships crossing on Thursday and none of them large crude carriers or LNG tankers, according to ship-tracking data.
The Strait of Hormuz handled about one-fifth of global oil and LNG supplies before the war, according to Reuters.
US energy secretary Chris Wright said the US military had helped move a seven-day average of about 8 million barrels of oil a day through the waterway, down from more than 20 million barrels per day before the conflict.
Iran's Parliament speaker has previously said Tehran would not reopen the strait until Washington meets commitments under a 14-point memorandum, including lifting the blockade, releasing frozen Iranian assets and easing oil sanctions.
Trump says Iran is not ready for ‘right deal’
Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said on Friday that Washington was watching developments in the conflict and suggested Tehran was not ready to accept what he considered an appropriate agreement.
Asked whether US military options against Iran were limited, Trump said, “It just means that we're seeing what happens.”
“We have total control of that entire region having to do with the Strait of Hormuz, and that means well into it, the land areas. So, they would love to make a deal, but they're not ready to make the right deal, in my opinion,” Trump said.
The comments came ahead of a planned announcement by US treasury secretary Scott Bessent on Monday on new sanctions against Iran. Bessent has said Washington would impose the “toughest sanctions in history” and sought China's cooperation in increasing economic pressure on Tehran.
China has rejected the approach, with its foreign ministry saying that “sanctions and pressure will not help resolve the issue” and calling for political and diplomatic efforts.
Iran has also criticised the planned sanctions. Foreign minister Abbas Araghchi described the campaign as a continuation of failed US pressure policies.
“14 years ago: 'Most crippling sanctions in history.' Failed. 8 years ago: 'Maximum pressure.' Failed. 5 months ago: 'Unconditional surrender.' Failed. Today: 'Most crushing economic operation ever.' Bound to fail. We have seen this movie before. Same bull. Different bullies,” Araghchi said in a post on X.
Iran's foreign ministry has separately accused Washington's planned measures of being “economic terrorism”, while a ministry spokesperson described possible secondary sanctions as an assertion of “extraterritorial sovereignty” over independent UN member states.
Facts Only
* President Masoud Pezeshkian called for an end to the war with the United States.
* Pezeshkian stated that Iran is in a position of power and dignity.
* Pezeshkian accused the United States of attacking Iranian schools, hospitals, and infrastructure.
* A memorandum of understanding between Tehran and Washington expired without a clear diplomatic breakthrough.
* Pezeshkian defended the June memorandum against parliamentary criticism, stating no capitulation existed in the agreement.
* Major-General Ali Abdollahi stated Iran’s armed forces would respond to new threats with crushing responses.
* IRGC chief Ahmad Vahidi referred to a "solid defensive shield" and advocated for the continuation of the "Strategy of Defensive and Offensive Empowerment."
* Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf noted that military power is insufficient without economic growth and financial turnover.
* Omani and Iranian foreign ministers discussed resuming dialogue and developments in the Strait of Hormuz.
* The Strait of Hormuz remains a center of confrontation with partial closure by Iran and a US naval counterblockade.
* US energy secretary Chris Wright reported that the US military facilitated the movement of oil through the strait, reducing daily volume from over 20 million barrels to about 8 million barrels during the conflict.
* US President Donald Trump suggested Tehran was not ready for an appropriate agreement.
* Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi described planned sanctions as a continuation of failed US pressure policies and termed them "economic terrorism."
Executive Summary
Full Take
The narrative presents a stark juxtaposition between high-level diplomatic rhetoric, military posturing, and severe economic constraints, all set against the backdrop of an unresolved conflict centered on critical maritime chokepoints. Pezeshkian's appeal for dignity while simultaneously asserting military strength suggests an attempt to recalibrate the global perception of Iran's position, framing resistance not as capitulation but as justified defense against external aggression. This rhetorical maneuver is immediately countered by the hardline military and political factions who signal an uncompromising readiness for escalation, indicating a deep internal divergence on conflict strategy.
The pattern of discourse reveals a dynamic where official political claims (dignity, victory) are layered over concrete power realities (military preparedness, economic vulnerability). The references to failed sanctions, framed by Iran as 'economic terrorism,' highlight a systemic mistrust regarding the efficacy and morality of external pressure mechanisms. Furthermore, the emphasis on the Strait of Hormuz—where operational facts about oil transit and blockades clash with political negotiations—underscores that tangible control over energy flow remains the central, unyielding variable in this dispute, regardless of diplomatic progress. The conflict demonstrates a persistent gap between symbolic political negotiations and the hard realities of geopolitical leverage exercised through force and economic mechanisms.
Bridge Questions: What are the underlying assumptions within both the Iranian leadership and external powers regarding the feasibility of negotiated settlements versus the necessity of military posturing? How does the framing of "victory" by one side inherently necessitate a counter-narrative that challenges established global perceptions? If diplomatic efforts remain stalled despite material constraints, what alternative structures of power—beyond military or economic leverage—are being implicitly debated among the key actors?