Iranian Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf says Iran’s conditions have been repeatedly and clearly stated to the mediators; the carrot-and-stick approach has no effect on Iran; progress can only be achieved once Iran’s seven conditions have been agreed upon

Iranian Parliament Speaker Ghalibaf says Iran’s conditions have been repeatedly and clearly stated to the mediators; the carrot-and-stick approach has no effect on Iran; progress can only be achieved once Iran’s seven conditions have been agreed upon.

Statements of this kind, hardline terms delivered through a senior domestic political figure rather than the foreign ministry, have in past Iranian negotiating cycles served to anchor the public ceiling before back-channel work continues; the posture and the private track have historically diverged. The substantive signal is the enumeration of fixed conditions, which in prior episodes has functioned either as a genuine precondition or as positioning ahead of a mediator's bridging proposal, and the distinction only becomes clear through the mediators' response cadence. Ghalibaf's form is rhetorical firmness, so the wording alone carries less information than its timing relative to the current round of contacts. The transmission channel for escalation or de-escalation headlines out of Tehran runs through crude via risk premium on Gulf supply and shipping insurance, with safe-haven bids in gold and the franc as secondary; headline-driven moves on rhetoric alone have tended to fade when no physical or kinetic follow-through materialises. Worth watching are any mediator statement, the posture of the negotiating team itself, and whether the conditions list shifts, which in comparable sequences has been the earliest tell of actual movement.