Iran-US Talks: Ghalibaf Says Progress Made But “Gaps Are Wide”

Spread love

Iran’s parliament speaker signals cautious diplomatic momentum — but warns of unresolved sticking points on nuclear rights and Strait of Hormuz as Islamabad talks continue

By TRH World Desk

New Delhi, April 19, 2026 — In what analysts are describing as a carefully calibrated message ahead of a potential diplomatic turning point, Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf gave a wide-ranging interview to Iranian state television — striking an explanatory rather than rhetorical tone, and laying out Tehran’s negotiating posture with unusual candour.

The interview was flagged by veteran Middle East correspondent Ali Hashem, who noted on X that Ghalibaf “covered several topics in what could be described as a message before a turning point” — with the most important takeaway being Ghalibaf’s own summary: “We made progress in the Islamabad negotiations, but the gaps are wide and some fundamental points remain.”

Iran’s Core Position: Negotiation as a “Method of Struggle”

Ghalibaf was direct about Iran’s philosophical approach to the current talks. Dismissing any suggestion of capitulation, he framed diplomacy explicitly as an extension of resistance.

“All the enemy’s effort was to impose their demands on us,” he said, adding: “It is important that we assert our rights — therefore, negotiation is a method of struggle here. Securing the nation’s rights must be our main goal, and rest assured that there will be no surrender in the diplomatic arena.”

The framing is significant: by calling negotiation a “method of struggle,” Ghalibaf is signalling domestically that engagement with Washington does not contradict Iran’s revolutionary doctrine — a message aimed as much at hardliners at home as at interlocutors abroad.

What Happened in Islamabad — And What Didn’t

Ghalibaf offered the most detailed Iranian account yet of how the Islamabad channel opened.

“Our negotiations began on Saturday when we arrived in Pakistan,” he said, clarifying that prior to that, “only in the last 48 hours of the war leading to the ceasefire, messages were exchanged through Pakistan.”

He identified Pakistani Army Chief General Asim Munir as the key mediator, saying their first meeting lasted two hours and fifteen minutes and focused almost entirely on the Lebanon ceasefire. Munir then relayed Iranian positions to the American side.

Tehran’s conditions for entering a formal 10-point negotiation framework were explicit: the Lebanon ceasefire must be established and Iran’s frozen assets released. Ghalibaf indicated that the ceasefire was implemented — but incompletely — and that this remains a source of tension.

“I emphasise that we have always sought to normalise transit through the Strait of Hormuz and still do,” he said. “If it has stopped now, it is because the ceasefire was not fully established in Lebanon.”

On Trump: “A Master of Lying and Psychological Warfare”

Ghalibaf did not hold back on his assessment of the Trump administration’s conduct during the talks. “If we were negotiating with the US at the time Trump said so, then why were there so many ultimatums? Why were they threatening to strike our infrastructure?” he asked.

He flatly contradicted American claims of early diplomatic engagement: “We did not conduct any negotiations until 48 hours before the ceasefire.”

His verdict on the US President was pointed: “Trump is a master of lying and psychological warfare. Yesterday he posted eight tweets, seven of which were lies.”

Nuclear File and Hormuz: Non-Negotiables on the Table

On the two most consequential issues — Iran’s nuclear programme and Strait of Hormuz transit rights — Ghalibaf acknowledged disagreement while holding firm.

“Currently, we also have disagreements on several issues related to the nuclear matter and the Strait of Hormuz,” he said. “Of course, the essence of negotiation is for understanding, but we have our principles,” he added.

He confirmed that both sides have one or two non-negotiable points each: “We insist on some issues which are non-negotiable for us, and their number is one or two, and the other side also has similar points.”

The bottom line, in his own words: “We have reached conclusions on some issues, but not on others, and other proposals have been made. We are still far from a final discussion.”

Step-by-Step Compliance: No Repeat of JCPOA Mistake

Drawing explicitly on Iran’s bitter experience with the 2015 nuclear deal (JCPOA) — which the US unilaterally abandoned in 2018 — Ghalibaf outlined a new compliance architecture that Tehran insists upon.

“We have tried to follow the experiences of past periods and the distrust towards the US,” he said. “In case of agreement, our policy will also be step-by-step action — it should not be that we fulfil our commitments but they do not. In case of agreement, we take one step and they must also take one step,” he added.

Breaking the War-Ceasefire Cycle

In perhaps his most strategic statement, Ghalibaf called for a fundamental restructuring of the regional security order — targeting the cycle that has defined decades of Middle East conflict.

“The Zionist regime and America have constantly had a cycle of war — ceasefire — peace, and this cycle must be broken,” he said. “Sustainable peace must be established with guarantees that war will not happen again,” he added.

The statement positions Iran not merely as a party defending its interests, but as a regional power demanding structural guarantees — a posture that will complicate, but not necessarily derail, any eventual framework agreement.

What to Watch Next

The Islamabad channel — with Pakistan playing an unprecedented mediation role between Tehran and Washington — is now the most active diplomatic track involving Iran. Key variables to monitor:

– Whether the Lebanon ceasefire is fully implemented to Iran’s satisfaction

– Movement on frozen Iranian assets, a precondition Tehran has set for deeper engagement

– Whether the nuclear red lines on either side can be bridged

– How the step-by-step compliance model is operationalised, if talks advance

For now, Ghalibaf’s message is one of cautious, principled engagement — progress acknowledged, surrender ruled out.

Trump Claims Trigger Iran Rebuttal as Middle East Crisis Deepens

FAQ:

Q: What did Ghalibaf say about the Islamabad negotiations with the US?

Ghalibaf confirmed that Iran made progress in talks held in Islamabad, mediated by Pakistani Army Chief General Asim Munir. However, he said “the gaps are wide and some fundamental points remain” unresolved, particularly on nuclear issues and the Strait of Hormuz.

Q: When did Iran begin negotiations with the US in the current round?

According to Ghalibaf, formal negotiations began when the Iranian delegation arrived in Pakistan on a Saturday. Before that, only indirect messages were exchanged through Pakistan in the final 48 hours before the ceasefire.

Q: What are Iran’s non-negotiable points in the talks?

Ghalibaf said Iran has “one or two” non-negotiable issues — though he did not name them explicitly. The US side also reportedly has a similar number of firm positions. Disagreements on the nuclear file and Strait of Hormuz transit rights were specifically mentioned.

Q: Why is the Strait of Hormuz relevant to the Iran-US talks?

Ghalibaf said Iran has always sought to normalise transit through the Strait of Hormuz but that the current disruption is linked to the incomplete implementation of the Lebanon ceasefire — framing Hormuz access as leverage tied to broader regional conditions.

Q: What did Ghalibaf say about Trump and US credibility?

Ghalibaf directly criticised Trump, calling him “a master of lying and psychological warfare” and denying that any negotiations took place when Trump publicly claimed talks were underway. He said seven of Trump’s eight recent tweets on the subject were false.