Iran's Security Chief Rezaei says they asked the Americans to provide a clear and explicit response to Iran's conditions, and they have not provided it to this day, but they may provide this response in the future, reports Al Mayadeen

• All American claims about continuing negotiations with Iran aim to alleviate economic pressure and lower oil prices
• The Strait of Hormuz will not open until our conditions are met.
• US claims of ongoing Iran negotiations and a Qatar meeting are false.
• Have announced Iran's 7 conditions, which are in fact the rights of the Iranian people, and the Strait of Hormuz will not open until these conditions are implemented.
• Iran is not holding any negotiations with the US.

Statements from senior Iranian security figures of this kind are standard instruments of coercive signalling in US-Iran standoffs, where public denial of negotiations has historically coexisted with back-channel contact, so the denial itself is a weaker signal than the operative condition attached to it. The load-bearing element here is the explicit linkage of the Strait of Hormuz to named preconditions: roughly a fifth of global oil supply and a substantial share of LNG transit passes through the strait, and past episodes of explicit conditioning have tended to be expressed first in freight rates, war-risk insurance premia and tanker behaviour rather than in immediate physical disruption, with the spot crude move following the shipping signal. The distinction worth drawing is between rhetoric aimed at a domestic and regional audience, where maximalist conditions are the norm and partial re-escalation language has often preceded de-escalation, and an actual kinetic or interdiction event, which is what has historically moved Brent spreads and the front of the curve in size. The counterparty claim that US talk of negotiations is intended to manage oil prices is itself a recurring trope in these exchanges and says little about substance. The tells are whether the conditions are enumerated in a form that admits negotiation, whether other Iranian institutions echo or soften the line, and whether tanker traffic and insurance quotes in the Gulf begin to reflect the threat. Carried by a regionally aligned outlet, the sourcing sits in the familiar pattern of message-sending rather than decision-announcing.