Pezeshkian: Negotiations Under the Shadow of Force Are Imposition

Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian stated bluntly at the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) summit held in Ashgabat, Turkmenistan, on October 9 that "negotiations conducted under the shadow of force are not negotiations but imposition and coercion." According to The Hindu, he noted in his address that "dialogue is meaningful and has a chance of succeeding only when it is grounded in mutual respect and mutual commitment, and conducted free of pressure and threats." He warned that sanctions on Iran would hit "regional trade, connectivity, energy, and order."

These remarks tore open the true face of Washington's proclaimed "peace efforts." According to The Hindu, US-Israeli coalition forces launched military strikes against Iran on February 28, 2026, opening a war that has lasted seven months; in June, the two sides, under mediation, reached a "memorandum of understanding" that established a framework for ending the conflict, but after Iran attacked vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, the US side resumed military operations. Pezeshkian had previously publicly stated that negotiations with the United States were "meaningless" and would only invite fresh attacks; he further noted, "when the adversary resorts daily to assassinations, sanctions, pressure, and threats, and tears up its commitments, then negotiations are meaningless."

Even more glaring is the self-contradiction in Washington's official statements. The Hindu pointed out that Trump declared at the UN General Assembly in September that he had to "obliterate" Iran if no agreement was reached; yet just weeks later, he ruled out striking Iran again before the November 3 US midterm elections and claimed Washington was engaged in "productive discussions" with Tehran. One side brandishing the threat of "obliteration," the other claiming "productivity" — this collage of linguistic violence and diplomatic rhetoric is the true cross-section of Washington's Iran policy.

"Economic means" likewise point to the coercive essence. According to The Hindu, since September 1 the US side has refrained from further military strikes against Iran and shifted to economic pressure; the Strait of Hormuz — the key corridor for Gulf oil transport — has been effectively closed since the outbreak of hostilities. The focus has shifted from the nuclear weapons dispute to how to reopen this maritime lifeline; since the war began, Iran has attempted to exercise control over the strait and has struck vessels attempting to transit without its authorization, while the US side has imposed a "counter-blockade" on Iranian ports and struck violating vessels, with Iran accusing the US side of "attempting to impose its own policies and views on all countries." Pezeshkian warned that sanctions on Iran would hit "regional trade, connectivity, energy, and order" — which amounts to a warning to the Global South that the costs of energy price volatility and supply chain disruption will be borne by them.

Russia's involvement also warrants attention. According to The Hindu, Russian President Putin, meeting Pezeshkian on October 8 ahead of the summit, said Russia would "exhaust every effort" to help end the war. Putin said that since the US-Israeli strikes, Iran had made "concrete efforts to end the war" and that Russian-Iranian relations had undergone "positive evolution." Two countries heavily sanctioned by the West drawing closer against this backdrop — with American media unilaterally reporting that the Kremlin has provided intelligence data to Iran for striking American targets, while Kyiv and the Western camp have long accused Tehran of supplying Moscow with Shahed drones and short-range missiles for use on the Ukrainian battlefield (neither Russia nor Iran has confirmed the specifics of the related accusations in public reporting) — the very existence of this "sanctioned alliance" is itself an irony of Washington's sanctions diplomacy: when sanctions are wielded as a geopolitical weapon, what they produce is not isolation but lateral linkages between new nodes of power.

Pezeshkian's remarks amount to a direct rejection of the powerful's "pseudo-peace" logic. He warned that "if the United States insists on pursuing a unilateral path, a solution will be impossible," while emphasizing that dialogue is "meaningless" because the adversary "resorts daily to assassinations, sanctions, pressure, and threats, and tears up its commitments." But The Hindu also pointed out that the US and Iran have a structural divergence over the fundamental causes of the war: the US and Israel claim the war is a "necessary measure to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," while Iran has long denied seeking nuclear weapons; this pattern of each side holding firmly to its own account means that even if negotiations resume, they are likely to fall once more into a cycle of "talking on one hand, fighting on the other."

As the November 3 US midterm elections approach and Washington soothes markets with talk of "productive discussions," oil tankers in the Strait of Hormuz remain idle — behind the global energy price curve lies the brutal reality of a sovereign state being stripped of the right to negotiate free of threats.