Iran says ready for nuclear talks as Trump admin prepares for maximum pressure

“What reasonable mind could conceive that Iran would offer guarantees against holding the perpetrators of Martyr Soleimani’s assassination accountable?” the ultra-hardline daily, whose managing editor Hossein Shariatmadari is an appointee of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, asked on Friday.

"No one in Iran can absolve the criminal Trump or offer assurances to the Americans that the killers of Martyr Soleimani will not face punishment. Additionally, alongside the pursuit of retribution by the Iranian nation and the Islamic Republic, other nations and resistance groups in the region and around the world are also seeking justice for the blood of Martyr Soleimani..." Kayhan wrote.

Qasem Soleimani, the former commander of the IRGC's Quds Force, was killed in a 2020 US drone strike near Baghdad International Airport on orders from then-President Donald Trump. This act has made Trump and his aides targets of alleged Iranian retaliation plots.

Kayhan issued a veiled threat on Friday, writing: “While some may label Trump a fool, it is unlikely that he is so oblivious as to fail to understand that no guarantees exist to shield him from accountability and retribution.”

Kayhan's statements come at a time when there are reports of a meeting between Trump's ally Elon Musk and Iran's UN envoy in New York earlier this week. Other Iranian newspapers criticized Kayhan for potentially jeopardizing efforts to reduce tensions with the US.

Iranian officials on numerous occasions since 2020 have issued threats against Trump and top officials of his first administration, such as former CIA Director Mike Pompeo and National Security Chief John Bolton.

Details of one such alleged plot emerged last week when the US Justice Department unsealed murder-for-hire charges against Farhad Shakeri, a 51-year-old Afghan national accused of being connected to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in a plan to target Trump.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Iran had sent written assurances to the Biden administration last month, denying any intent to assassinate Trump. This communication responded to a private American warning issued in September, highlighting the administration’s stance that threats against Trump would represent aggression against the United States.

US officials underlined that any attempt on Trump’s life would be treated as an act of war, aligning with the administration’s public position, the Wall Street Journal wrote.

Kayhan’s editorial diverged from the Iranian government’s official position, which had already dismissed accusations of a plot to assassinate Trump as fabricated. Last week, the Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman described the allegations as “suspicious, malicious, and baseless.”

In response, Kayhan questioned: “The idea that Iran’s alleged assassination plot against Trump is false and that the referenced report is baseless is true. But why is assassinating Trump considered a malicious act? Eliminating the murderer of Martyr Soleimani, Martyr Abu Mahdi, and countless other oppressed people is a noble, righteous, and necessary act—not a malicious one.”

The daily later softened its tone, noting that the Foreign Ministry had explained the use of the word “malicious” differently, seemingly clearing up the misunderstanding.

Since Trump’s election in 2016, Iranian politicians have been divided over how to address his tough stance on Iran. Some have advocated for diplomacy, while others have leaned toward strong defensive strategies, including nuclear deterrence.

Meanwhile, sources cited by Financial Times on Saturday revealed that Trump’s incoming administration plans to revive its “maximum pressure” campaign to cripple Iran’s ability to fund regional proxies and develop nuclear weapons. The team intends to tighten sanctions on Tehran, particularly its vital oil exports, immediately after taking office.

“Our adversaries possess extensive and ready-to-deploy arsenals of nuclear warheads, leaving Iran at a significant strategic disadvantage,” Ahmad Naderi told local media on Saturday for the second time since last week. “Over the years, we have incurred costs equivalent to several times the expense of constructing an atomic bomb through our nuclear program, yet it has yielded no tangible security benefits.”

"I believe we must pursue atomic weapons testing, as no other path remains for us given the lack of regional balance," he added, in an apparent reference to setbacks by Iran's regional proxies.

This stance aligns with a recent call by 39 Iranian lawmakers urging the Supreme National Security Council to reassess the country’s defense strategy. They argued that Iran's current policies might be inadequate in addressing perceived threats, particularly from Israel.

The lawmakers also raised doubts about the long-term viability of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s religious decree banning nuclear weapons, suggesting that evolving circumstances could warrant a shift in approach.

MP Mohammad Reza Sabaghian described nuclear weapons as essential for deterrence, arguing they are necessary for self-defense in light of Israel’s arsenal. Others, such as MP Hassanali Akhlaghi Amiri, suggested that Khamenei’s fatwa could evolve, as Islamic rulings can adapt over time to new circumstances. He explained that secondary rulings can replace primary ones when conditions change, implying the fatwa is not permanent.

Iranian officials have consistently portrayed the country’s nuclear program as peaceful, frequently citing Khamenei’s religious decree against weapons of mass destruction. However, growing calls from lawmakers advocating for nuclear armament highlight the increasing pressure Tehran faces. These debates unfold amid heightened tensions with Israel and global uncertainty as the United States transitions to a new administration.

A more immediate concern, however, is Israel’s recent military actions, which have significantly weakened Tehran’s proxies, Hamas and Hezbollah, and included large-scale airstrikes on military targets inside Iran.

The relatively moderate news website Rouydad24 linked these discussions to Iran’s preparations for the January 20 US presidential transition, highlighting a dual-track strategy: balancing internal demands for a more aggressive defense posture with external diplomatic efforts. The push for a tougher stance comes primarily from hardliners, while the diplomatic initiatives reflect the government’s approach to navigating the shifting geopolitical landscape.

"Some in Iran maintain that hostility and antagonism with the United States are insurmountable, irrespective of whether Trump or another figure is in power. Others, however, argue for recognizing opportunities and responding to positive signals," the publication wrote on Saturday.

Pointing to the current Iranian administration’s strategy, the publication highlighted the government's activation of various diplomatic channels, including public and covert efforts, to navigate the challenges ahead.

Hesamodin Ashna, an advisor in Hassan Rouhani’s former administration, also noted that Iran’s most experienced diplomats are actively working across multiple channels. He cited Ali Larijani’s visits to Syria and Lebanon, where discussions included regional ceasefires, alongside reported international meetings involving Iranian representatives.

The government “is utilizing all its diplomatic capacities to address the situation wisely,” he wrote on X on Saturday.

With tensions rising and the potential for international pressure increasing, Tehran appears to be exploring both hardline measures and broader diplomatic strategies to safeguard its national interests.

Speaking to the US-based television network EWTN on Friday, Prince Reza Pahlavi said, “This regime in four decades has proven to be unreliable, dubious, untrustworthy, and I don't think it is ever possible to come to any deal with it.”

His comments follow reports that Tesla CEO and tech giant Elon Musk, now appointed to lead president-elect Trump's new Department of Government Efficiency, met this week with Iran's ambassador to the United Nations—an encounter Tehran denied on Saturday.

Pahlavi described the Islamic Republic as inherently hostile to principles such as equality, human rights, and freedom, emphasizing that it operates as an extremist ideological system.

“It is an ideological radical regime that wants to export its ideology, while repressing its own people at home and trying to change the world the way they want to see it abroad.”

In a separate interview with Newsmax, Pahlavi called for a policy of maximum pressure on the Islamic Republic, paired with maximum support for the people of Iran.

He said that the Iranian people are the only ones capable of enacting meaningful change. "The solution is to make sure that the Iranian people have a better equal playing field so they internally bring pressure that will force the regime to collapse.

"That should be the foundation of the approach to the Iranian solution, which will ultimately make America breathe easier — not by deploying its fleets to maintain stability, but by depending on a nation that is freed from a regime that, unlike them, celebrates martyrdom and death."

On November 14, Pahlavi released a video message announcing his readiness to lead Iran through a transitional period and the formation of a national government. Addressing Iranians, he urged them to take advantage of the Islamic Republic’s weakened state, which he attributed to its loss of legitimacy and international setbacks.

Highlighting Iran’s wealth in natural and human resources, Pahlavi condemned Tehran’s mismanagement, saying, “Our Iran is rich in natural resources and human capital, and its people should never have to worry about lack of water and bread, medicine and healthcare, or fuel and electricity in the heat and cold.”

Concluding his message, Pahlavi said, “Now is the time to decide. Let us move towards a bright and free, prosperous and flourishing future.”

Earlier, when questioned about the issue, a representative from Iran's UN Mission in New York responded, "We have no comment on this matter," according to Iranian state media on Friday.

The foreign ministry spokesman who issued the denial on Saturday, according to the government news website IRNA, did not comment further except expressing his surprise at the "extensive" media coverage.

The initial report raised significant questions about President-elect Donald Trump's Iran policy, specifically whether he plans to intensify pressure on Tehran or pursue dialogue to ease tensions in the Middle East.

The Associated Press, quoting an unnamed American official, confirmed that the talks, held on November 12, were requested by the Islamic Republic, while the initial report had said the request came from Musk.

According to reports, the discussion spanned key geopolitical issues, including Iran’s nuclear program, its regional alliances with proxies, and the possibility of reducing tensions with the United States.

“The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss a non-US governmental meeting, said no immediate decisions were taken by either side. The official said the Iranians sought the meeting with Musk, the world’s richest man, and that it did not take place at the Iranian mission to the UN,” wrote AP on Saturday.

The New York Times, which first broke the story, presented a slightly different account, saying Musk himself initiated the meeting, held at a location chosen by the Iranian side.

The official also told AP that no concrete agreements emerged, and both governments have refrained from commenting on the discussions.

Neither Elon Musk nor President-elect Donald Trump's team has refuted the report, indicating that it could be an early move by the incoming administration to establish communication and engage with the Islamic Republic.

Divided reactions in Tehran

In Iran, the meeting has provoked sharply contrasting reactions. The ultra-hardline Kayhan newspaper financed by Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei's office, overseen by Hossein Shariatmadari, a representative of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, vehemently opposed the talks. In an editorial, Kayhan dismissed the meeting as outside the authority of Iranian officials to pursue, especially given Musk’s ties to Trump. The paper wrote:

“Based on all legal principles, the blood of General Qasem Soleimani remains on the hands of Trump and some members of his administration. No one in Iran can absolve the criminal Trump or provide guarantees to the American side that the perpetrators of the martyrdom of Soleimani will not be punished.”

Ahmad Zeidabadi, a reformist commentator, responded to Kayhan saying, “Kayhan's opposition to the meeting between Elon Musk and the representative of the Islamic Republic in New York is completely natural, as this event took place during the presidency of Masoud Pezeshkian!”

If this event had occurred during the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or the late Ebrahim Raisi, added Zeidabadi, “Kayhan would have presented it as a diplomatic masterpiece or an unprecedented victory and, in response to potential criticisms, would have written: ‘The vile critics and opponents cannot bear to see the success of the government!’”

Meanwhile, Sobh-e-No, a newspaper aligned with Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, took a more measured tone. It highlighted the potential benefits of Musk’s close relationship with Trump.

“Musk’s unofficial role could complement Trump’s unconventional diplomatic strategies, offering a chance to bypass traditional government structures,” Sobh-e-No argued, pointing to Musk’s ability to leverage his influence with the incoming administration.

The reformist daily Ham Mihan highlighted that "the strategy of the Iranian diplomatic team is on track and has received a positive and reciprocal response from the American side."

And, Sazandegi, another reformist publication, viewed the meeting as a sign of Iran engaging in covert diplomacy with the United States.

Musk’s role as a diplomatic outsider

The meeting shows Musk’s expanding presence in global geopolitics, an unusual role for a figure best known for his business ventures. His close ties to Trump have positioned him as a potential intermediary in high-stakes negotiations.

Trump’s communications director, Steven Cheung, declined to confirm the meeting, reflecting the cautious approach both sides are taking in managing the fallout.

Karoline Leavitt, a spokesperson for Trump’s transition team, emphasized the administration’s focus on restoring US leadership on the global stage.

“The American people re-elected President Trump because they trust him to lead our country and restore peace through strength around the world. When he returns to the White House, he will take the necessary action to do just that,” she said.

Uncertain outcomes

While the meeting - now denied by Tehran - hints at exploratory efforts to address decades-long hostilities between Iran and the US, the practical implications remain unclear. Iranian unnamed officials in interviews with The New York Times described the talks as “good news,” but no immediate breakthroughs were announced.

For now, the diplomatic overture is a reflection of both the entrenched challenges and the rare opportunities for engagement between the two nations.

Musk, who has not commented publicly on the meeting, continues to shape his evolving role in US policy under Trump’s leadership.

The rejections over unacceptably high aflatoxin levels sparked concerns over the future of Iran’s pistachio exports not only to Europe but also to other global markets.

The setback highlights systemic challenges within Iran's agricultural export policies including official negligence, poor quality controls and the entrance into the market by non-traditional players like the cash-strapped auto industry.

Early warnings ignored

In 2022, the EU announced stricter standards for aflatoxin levels in imported pistachios from Iran. However, Iranian officials failed to adequately address these warnings, in a delay that has proven costly.

Of the approximately 7,500 tons of pistachios Iran exports annually to the EU, 26 shipments were ultimately rejected.

“The main point is why have contamination levels increased over the past two years despite EU warnings and government follow-ups,” said Deputy Minister of Agriculture for Horticulture Affairs Mohammad Mehdi Boromandi.

This oversight has not only jeopardized EU imports but also raised concerns about the broader perception of Iranian pistachios in global markets.

“This issue should have been resolved six months ago instead of looking for solutions now,” said Abdollah Mohajer Darabi, a board member of the Iranian Chamber of Commerce earlier this month, criticizing the government’s reactive approach.

Quality decline and market disruption

Beyond aflatoxin concerns, Iranian pistachio exports have been disrupted by non-traditional players entering the market. Automotive companies, struggling to secure foreign currency for importing parts, have turned to pistachio exports to finance their operations.

These companies lack expertise in the pistachio trade, according to officials.

“They export the worst and lowest-quality pistachios, losing global markets and tarnishing the reputation of Iranian pistachios,” says Mohammad Ali Mohammad Mirzaian, head of the Export Development Commission of the Kerman Chamber of Commerce.

“Before the New Year, pistachios sold for $7,200 per ton in China. When automotive companies entered the market, they sold at about 5% below market value,” Mirzaian added.

Mohammad Salehi, chairman of the Pistachio Association of Iran said the supply disruption caused exports to China to plummet from 200,000 tons last year to less than 20,000 tons this year.

External challenges

Compounding these issues are logistical challenges and energy shortages within Iran. In September 2024, widespread power outages in Kerman province, a major pistachio-producing region, led to significant crop losses.

20% to 40% of the province’s pistachio crop came in hollow due to power cuts, according to Hamidreza Torabi, chairman of the Agricultural Commission of the Kerman Chamber of Commerce.

Additionally, Ahmad Heydari, director of Agricultural Jihad in Rafsanjan, reported the destruction of 7,200 tons of pistachios in the city due to repeated power outages.

Missed opportunities

Efforts to address EU concerns were further stymied by a lack of cooperation. Iranian officials extended invitations for EU representatives to visit production facilities, but these were declined. Similarly, Iranian representatives were not granted permits to travel to Europe for discussions.

“The government’s misguided policies regarding exports and the involvement of non-specialists have pushed real exporters out of the market,” Boromandi said. He also warned that without changes, Iranian pistachios may disappear from global markets entirely within two years.

The stakes are high for Iran, which exports tens of thousands of tons of pistachios annually, making the crop a critical part of its non-oil export economy.

“Iran must align its pistachio export policies with international standards to ensure competitiveness,” Boromandi added.

Whether these measures can reverse the damage remains to be seen, but without significant reforms, the future of Iranian pistachios in global markets hangs in the balance.