Babak Vahdad@BabakVahdad
In an interview with Al Mayadeen that offers a remarkably clear window into Iranian strategic thinking on the war and expectations surrounding future negotiations, former IRGC commander Mohsen Rezaei says the US is trying to stage a symbolic “reopening” of the Strait of Hormuz and then quietly exit the region without paying a price, but argues Tehran will not allow that.
According to Rezaei, Iran believes the confrontation must produce concrete political and strategic gains, including compensation for war damages and the release of frozen Iranian assets before any serious negotiations can resume.
Interestingly, he claims that Pakistan’s prime minister informed Tehran that Washington initially accepted Iran’s 10 conditions, but that the negotiating team linked to JD Vance later introduced positions contradicting those understandings, leading to a collapse in talks.
This is one of the reasons why, from Tehran’s perspective, it becomes increasingly difficult to take Washington’s negotiating posture seriously when US positions appear to shift constantly and the broader diplomatic reference points remain highly volatile and unpredictable.
Rezaei further alleges that during the final day of the ceasefire, the US deployed naval and air assets to the Sea of Oman in an attempt to pressure and “encircle” Iran before once again requesting negotiations.
The broader point emerging from Rezaei’s remarks, as many analysts including myself underline, is that Tehran increasingly treats resilience itself as a strategic asset.
In the Iranian view, surviving pressure, absorbing escalation, and refusing to bend under military and economic coercion are absolute values in strategic terms.
The assumption is that, contrary to the US reading, endurance becomes political capital: the longer Iran withstands pressure while maintaining strategic capabilities and regional influence, the stronger it believes its position becomes at the negotiating table, despite tactical (as opposed to strategic) losses.
#Iran #Iranwar
