Iran Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf says "When we say we both fight and negotiate, we do not mean that we are waging an endless war or constant negotiation."

Rhetoric of this kind from senior Iranian officials is a familiar feature of the country's negotiating posture: hardline public framing that preserves escalation credibility while leaving the door open to talks, the fight-and-negotiate formulation being a longstanding staple of the system rather than a departure from it. Parliament speakers sit in the political rather than the military chain of command, so remarks from this office have historically carried less weight as an operational signal than statements from the Supreme Leader's office or the IRGC; the tell in past episodes has been whether rhetoric of this kind is matched by kinetic follow-through, proxy activation, or movement in the nuclear file, rather than the wording itself. The market transmission channel, when it exists, runs through the crude risk premium: tanker traffic and insurance costs around the Strait of Hormuz, and the Brent-Dubai spread rather than flat price alone, with episodes of rhetorical escalation typically fading within sessions when unaccompanied by action. What tends to matter next is whether other officials echo or soften the line, and whether back-channel or formal negotiations continue in parallel, since the dual-track framing explicitly concedes that talks remain live. As a standalone headline from a political figure, precedent suggests this is noise within an established pattern rather than a shift in it.