Trump touts negotiations but tries to cripple Iran, Pezeshkian says

“If the US attempts any mischief, as the Supreme Leader has warned, we will respond decisively,” Brigadier General Majid Khademi said in the wake of US President Donald Trump's ultimatum for Iran to come to the negotiating table or risk military action.

“Should they threaten us, we will threaten them. If they act on their threats, we are fully prepared to retaliate, putting their national interests at risk across the world," added Khademi.

Last week, Trump reinstated his so-called "maximum pressure" policy on Iran, which includes efforts to drive its oil exports down to zero.

In several interviews, however, Trump said he preferred striking a deal to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon over bombing the country.

“Trump approached negotiations with deception, revealing some of his goals while hiding others,” Khademi said. “He aimed to dismantle Iran’s nuclear, missile, and conventional defense programs—capabilities essential for any nation.”

The IRGC commander also accused the US of misunderstanding the Iranian people while asserting that Trump had exposed America’s true nature. “As the Supreme Leader has stated, we have no limits on global engagement, but negotiations with the US remain off-limits.”

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei voiced his clear opposition to negotiations with the US on February 7, saying such talks are "not smart, wise, or honorable."

Khademi said that any negotiation must be "intelligent, honorable, and rational," aligning with the Supreme Leader’s messaging.

"The president said what needed to be said," Ali Khamenei said, addressing defense officials on Wednesday, adding, “(Masoud) Pezeshkian spoke the words of the people and conveyed their true sentiments."

During this week's rally marking the anniversary of the 1979 Islamic Revolution, Pezeshkian accused the US of duplicity, saying that President Donald Trump called for negotiations while continuing sanctions.

Following a few weeks of ambivalent signals regarding negotiations and a struggle in Tehran's political scene, Khamenei finally voiced his clear opposition to negotiations on February 7, saying talks with the US are "not smart, wise, or honorable."

The Supreme Leader spoke during a visit to an exhibition of the country’s latest military products, where he said Iran should further develop its military, including its missiles.

"Progress should not be stopped. We cannot be satisfied with our current level. If we previously set a limit for the accuracy of our missiles but now feel that limit is no longer sufficient, we must push forward," he said. "Today, our defensive power is well-known, and our enemies fear it. This is crucial for our country."

Khamenei made no mention of Trump during the event.

In spite of scattered protests around the country over economic conditions, he described this week's state-sponsored rallies as a message of unity from the Iranian people.

“Despite the constant, idiotic threats against us, the people of Iran showed the world their identity, their strength, and their unwavering resolve," he said.

Khamenei’s comments came a day after Iran's UN ambassador, Amir Saeid Iravani, condemned what he called "reckless and inflammatory statements" by Trump in interviews with The New York Post and Fox News, in which Trump said that he preferred striking a deal to prevent Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon rather than bombing the country.

Last week, Trump reinstated his so-called "maximum pressure" policy on Iran, which includes efforts to drive its oil exports down to zero.

In a sign of growing internal debate, Massih Mohajeri of the Jomhouri Eslami newspaper sharply criticized officials and media figures who brand supporters of negotiations as “infiltrators” and “dishonored elements”, describing this stance as “utterly against freedom of expression.”

Despite Khamenei’s strong opposition to talks with the United States, some Iranian officials and media have continued to discuss the possibility of negotiations.

Though Mohajeri—personally appointed by Khamenei as the paper’s editor—did not name specific targets, his remarks were widely interpreted as aimed at ultraconservative lawmakers and Kayhan, another newspaper funded by Khamenei.

Mohajeri argued that such individuals and media outlets oppose the principles and teachings of Islam and cannot persuade public opinion to reject negotiations.

Meanwhile, Vice President Mohammad Reza Aref reinforced Khamenei’s stance against talks with the Trump administration.

"Both sides should benefit from transactions, but I believe there is no profit in dealing with the United States. Trump has shown that he is not trustworthy," he said, adding that "Trump may be trusted only if he is reformed, and that is unlikely to happen."

Kourosh Ahmadi, a former Iranian diplomat who served at Iran’s mission to the United Nations in New York, highlighted what he called a disinformation campaign by Iranian officials aiming to distort Trump’s message to Tehran. He also dismissed as “meaningless” the claim that negotiations are tantamount to surrender, arguing instead that maintaining a tough stance can compel the other side to retreat or modify its position.

Ahmadi added that as it has been stated in a White House document issued last week, "the fact that negotiation has become a taboo in Iran is not understandable."

He said that the National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) signed by Trump is aimed at "restoring maximum pressure on the government of the Islamic Republic of Iran, denying Iran all paths to a nuclear weapon, and countering Iran’s malign influence abroad."

He further characterized Iranian Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf's statement, that alleged Trump wishes to disarm Iran, as disinformation and fake news and added that only the text that has been signed by Trump should be considered as his and the White House's official view.

However, he noted, "During the first two weeks after his inauguration, Trump created some hope for the start of negotiations with Iran. I have no idea what led to the unexpected shift in his position." Ahmadi suggested that Trump's approach might have been a negotiation tactic, similar to his dealings with Mexico and Panama, where he initially took an aggressive stance but softened his tone once he saw signs of agreement from the other side.

Despite perceptions in Tehran that Trump has taken a harsher stance toward the Islamic Republic, his position remains unchanged from his first term. This time, however, he has balanced his renewed “maximum pressure” strategy with a stronger emphasis on seeking peace through diplomacy.

The former Iranian diplomat urged officials to consider Trump's memorandum and the White House statement within a broader context to avoid being misled. He also cautioned those influenced by the disinformation campaign, emphasizing that "proper decision-making requires accurate information."

In his editorial, Mohajeri emphasized that the Iranian constitution grants everyone the right to express their views, including on negotiations with the United States. However, he reiterated that "Khamenei is the one who has the final say about relations with the United States" and criticized Trump’s approach, stating, "The US president spoke arrogantly and put forward irrational expectations."

"If the US president gives up his arrogant rhetoric and speaks modestly with Iran, then the roads to negotiation are open," he concluded.

"Negotiation is a strategic approach that Iran, as a nation committed to dialogue, has always pursued," the Fatemeh Mohajerani said following a cabinet meeting. However, she emphasized that "coercion and maximum pressure cannot be called negotiation."

She added that while Iranians will not bow to force or double standards. "You cannot issue maximum pressure policies with a smile and then claim to seek negotiations," she said.

US President Donald Trump has said he much prefers a deal over Iran's nuclear program over any military confrontation but reimposed harsh sanctions from his first term.

On February 5, Trump signed a presidential directive to resume his "maximum pressure" policy against the Islamic Republic, with the aim of reducing its oil exports to zero.

Trump also told Fox News "there are two ways to stop Tehran from developing a nuclear weapon: ‘With bombs or with a written piece of paper’."

Iran's Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei has expressed opposition to negotiating with the US, saying such talks "have no impact on solving the country’s problems"."Negotiating would not be wise, intelligent or honorable," added Khamenei, who is the ultimate decision-makers on all matters of state.

On Monday, during state-led celebrations marking the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, several officials criticized Trump’s threats and the issue of negotiations.

In a speech, President Masoud Pezeshkian said, "Trump says, ‘Let’s negotiate,’ but signs every possible conspiracy against Iran and then claims he is ready for talks." Earlier, Pezeshkian said, "Our enemies think that if they besiege us, we will die of hunger," aligning with Khamenei’s stance against negotiations.

As a cyber espionage investigator focused on Iranian state-sponsored hacking, I’ve observed these operations evolve steadily—from initial reconnaissance to targeted intrusions.

Even when US agencies unmask these hackers, legal and enforcement actions often drag on for months or years, allowing adversaries to rebrand and operate under new aliases.

Yaser Balaghi Inalou, one of three Iranian hackers recently indicted by the Department of Justice for a hack and leak operation targeting the 2024 presidential election, was exposed as early as 2015 by the Israeli security firm Check Point.

Had US agencies exposed him at the time, it might have fractured his network and even disrupted the attack on Donald Trump’s 2024 campaign.

With President Trump’s second term underway and the possibility of deepened tensions between Tehran and Washington, a cohesive and decisive strategy to address this threat seems imperative.

Intelligence agencies may unmask hackers quickly. But those unmasked would regroup and evolve if legal and enforcement responses are delayed. Greater collaboration may be required between federal agencies like the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security, even with private cybersecurity firms, to ensure swift countermeasures such as targeted sanctions and asset freezes.

Also important would be rebuilding trust in US whistleblower programs. Insider intelligence from those with firsthand knowledge of Iranian cyber operations—whether from inside Iran or abroad—can be invaluable.

The current track record of the Rewards for Justice (RFJ) program discourages potential informants. Its FAQ page still highlights cases from 1995 and 2007, with no reference to payouts for whistleblowers in Iranian cyber operations.

Providing a recent example on its website or social media could restore credibility and encourage more people to come forward. As it stands, many of those engaging with the program on social media view it as more of a stunt than a serious incentive.

Public exposure of Iranian cyber operatives is another critical measure. Many operatives hide behind the guise of IT professionals. Publishing updated lists of identified operatives in English and Persian could help rid these groups of the secrecy on which they rely.

Sanctions and asset seizures also remain powerful tools. Iran’s cyber operations are largely directed by state entities like the Ministry of Intelligence and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), already designated as a terrorist organization by the US. Expanding efforts to track and freeze financial assets tied to these entities could significantly disrupt Tehran’s ability to fund its hacker networks.

The importance of swift and proportional countermeasures cannot be overstated. Delayed responses—sometimes by as much as a year—reduce deterrence and embolden threat actors.

Strengthening alliances and building a collective defense mechanism would also enhance deterrence by creating a more formidable response.

The United States relies on digital systems, from essential public services to financial networks. As the reliance grows, so does the threat posed by Iranian cyber operations, likely expanding as Tehran tries to avoid traditional military confrontation.

With the changing of the guards in Washington, new policies should be devised to protect the US digital infrastructure while holding Iran accountable for its online aggression. The implications of inaction are clear—continued vulnerability and escalating threats.