The deception of negotiations

What I want to say about political and international issues is brief. My statements in this regard are not long. It is about the uproar of negotiations which has been brought up recently. Foreigners constantly speak about it and newspaper and propagandists write about it all the time. By “negotiation” - they say that Iran should return to the negotiating table – they do not mean negotiation in its general sense of the word. What they mean is negotiation with the US government. Otherwise, we are already negotiating with other countries – with European and other countries. We have no problems in this regard. We are negotiating with the Europeans and others.

The issue is about determining the subject of the negotiations. We will not negotiate on every matter. We do not negotiate on the strategic issues of the Revolution. We will not negotiate on our military capabilities. Because, by negotiation, they mean making a deal. For example, they say, “You should accept our terms and you should be willing to give up the defense mechanisms that give you the power to defend.” Well, this is not negotiable. Negotiating on these matters has two parts and is easily concluded: he says, “we want this” and we respond, “we don’t accept!”.  So, negotiations will not move forward and there will be no deal.

This is like a marriage proposal ceremony when someone asks, “How is the issue of your marriage getting along?” and the other person responds, “Everything is concluded. Only two issues remain. We say, ‘We want your daughter’, and they respond, ‘The hell you do!’” [Supreme Leader and audience laugh].   The issue is resolved through fundamental matters, through these two issues. This means that negotiation in this sense is not feasible – negotiation in the sense of a deal. Here, negotiation means making a deal. The goal is not to merely sit and chat. So, by negotiation – they constantly say that Iran should return to the negotiating table, both the Americans and others say this – they mean negotiating with the US.

Well, regarding negotiating with the US, we have said many times that we will not negotiate. What is the reason? I have given the reason in different discussions: first of all, negotiating with the US will be of no use to us and secondly, it will be harmful. In other words, it is something useless and detrimental. I have already explained these issues.

I want to add another point. When the Americans target something in their relations with a certain government and country and when they want to reach their goal by exerting pressure, pressure works as a strategy for them, but as well as this strategy, they have a tactic which is negotiations. They exert pressure to exhaust the other side. When they feel that the other side is exhausted and might accept their terms, they say, “Very well, let us negotiate.” Negotiations complement their pressures.

The purpose of the negotiations is to reap, yield and obtain the fruits of their pressures. This is the purpose of negotiating. They exert pressure and when the other side is exhausted and feels that he has no other choice, they say, “Very well, let us negotiate.” And they sit at the negotiating table. They wish to establish and obtain what they have prepared through the pressures. This is the nature of negotiating with the US. Its strategy is not to negotiate. Its strategy is to exert pressure and negotiations are a subset of those pressures.

And the way to confront this strategy is only one thing and that is: if the other side has an instrument to exert pressure, he should use it. This is the only way. If he uses that instrument, then he can stop the other side or he can decrease or stop their pressures provided that they use their instruments. However, if this does not happen and if he is deceived by the invitation to negotiate and says to himself, “Now that he wants to negotiate, there is no need for me to use my instruments of exerting pressure which are available to me. Why should I do so? Let us negotiate”, if he is deceived by this, he has slipped and he will be ruined. In other words, defeat will be definite.

This is the only way. We have instruments to exert pressure in the face of the pressures of the US. Unlike what they want to say and promote, these pressure instruments are not military weapons and the like. If need be, we will use those weapons for sure, but what we mean by these instruments is not this. We have other means of exerting pressure. The measure that was recently adopted and announced by the Supreme National Security Council is one of the pressure instruments. They said, “now that you are behaving like this and now that the Europeans are not fulfilling their obligations, we will not fulfil ours in certain areas and within a certain scope”.

This means that we too will not abide by our obligations. This was a correct move. The move was the correct one. This is one of the ways. When you fail to utilize your pressure instruments and pivots, the other side will rest assured and he will not be in a rush. He will keep delaying the matter because he knows that he will not be at a disadvantage. However, if you manage to use your pressure instruments, he will have to do something.  

May 29, 2019


  • Donald Trump
  • Experiences from JCPOA
  • Iran
  • Iran Deal
  • negotiating with the US
  • Nuclear Talks


  • 2019-07-11 15:37
    Allah may bless you , the leader of millions heart !
  • Asssalamu alekum. Accurate and well said. However, there is a political theory that underwrites this; which is primacy. This is merely another means of achieving primacy. When you know that you are dealing with the ubermensch, why do you, in the first place, battle (negotiate in this instance) with them on their own turf? Just today PressTV headlined: "Official: Iran may return to pre-JCPOA conditions", The spokesman for AEOI stating: "Tehran is planning to go back to the conditions preceding the landmark 2015 nuclear deal unless European signatories fulfill their obligations." The point being the word "unless"! If you know they are playing with you, why the "unless"? Is the govt paying attention to Ayatollah Khamenei's political acumen? The same political idiocy exist(ed) in Palestine: Take 10 and give back 1 if the Palestinians behave, then repeat! Thank you. Zahir Ebrahim, California,