Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian has told the United Nations that Tehran remains prepared for diplomacy with the United States but will not accept negotiations conducted under military threats, speaking as the two sides reopen direct or mediated contacts over ending the conflict. Reuters reported that Pezeshkian used his September 23 address to the General Assembly to defend Iran’s military actions as defensive while arguing that the Strait of Hormuz cannot operate normally if Iranian shipping remains restricted.
The speech followed renewed diplomatic activity in New York. President Donald Trump said on September 22 that US and Iranian officials were talking and that he believed an eventual settlement was possible, while a senior Iranian official separately told Reuters that Tehran could reopen the Strait of Hormuz within seven days if Washington eased military pressure and lifted its blockade on Iranian ports.
Why has the Strait of Hormuz become the central bargaining point in US-Iran negotiations?
Before the war, roughly one-fifth of globally traded oil and liquefied natural gas moved through the Strait of Hormuz, making the waterway one of the world economy’s most important chokepoints. The conflict has sharply restricted shipping, forcing producers, tanker operators and refiners to seek alternative routes and contributing to elevated energy prices.
Iran argues that it should not be expected to guarantee unrestricted passage for other countries while its own shipping and ports face military and economic pressure. Pezeshkian told the General Assembly that permanent deployment of hostile fleets and continued war would not produce peace, explicitly linking maritime security to Iran’s wider dispute with Washington.
A senior Iranian official went further before the speech, saying Tehran could reopen the strait within seven days if the United States reduced military pressure and lifted restrictions on Iranian ports. That offer remains conditional rather than an agreed timetable, but it creates a measurable pathway for negotiators.
What did Donald Trump say after the latest contacts with Iran?
Trump said the two sides had been communicating during the UN General Assembly and expressed confidence that a settlement would eventually be reached. He maintained that any agreement must prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, a longstanding US objective that remains one of the hardest issues in negotiations.
His diplomatic language came alongside much more confrontational rhetoric. During his UN address, Trump defended the war and warned that the United States could escalate dramatically if no agreement were reached, comments that Pezeshkian subsequently rejected in his own speech.
The simultaneous threats and negotiations underline the unusual structure of the current diplomatic process. Neither side has suspended its military posture, yet both are signalling that talks remain possible if the other makes sufficiently meaningful concessions.
Has Iran agreed to reopen the Strait of Hormuz?
Not yet. Tehran has outlined conditions under which it says reopening could occur, but no signed agreement has been announced and shipping conditions remain dependent on military and political developments.
Iran’s proposal links maritime normalisation to a reduction in US military pressure and an end to restrictions affecting Iranian ports. Washington would need to decide whether any sanctions or blockade measures could be relaxed before a comprehensive settlement, while Iran would need to provide sufficient guarantees that commercial vessels could transit safely.
France has separately begun developing a UN Security Council proposal for an international mechanism intended to restore freedom of navigation through Hormuz. Diplomats told Reuters that Paris is coordinating with Washington and hopes to construct language capable of attracting broader support than previous attempts.
Why are oil markets reacting so strongly to every diplomatic signal?
The current supply disruption affects crude oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas simultaneously. Even relatively small changes in expectations about Hormuz can therefore alter forecasts for global supply.
Brent crude remained around $100 a barrel during the latest talks, while diesel and other refined-product markets have experienced particularly severe shortages. Saudi Arabia and other Gulf producers have tried to reroute exports, but alternative pipelines and ports cannot fully replicate unrestricted Hormuz capacity.
If Iran reliably reopened the strait, tanker flows could increase substantially and reduce some of the risk premium embedded in prices. A breakdown in negotiations could produce the opposite effect, particularly if renewed military action threatened ports, tankers or offshore infrastructure.
Why did the US delegation walk out during Pezeshkian’s UN speech?
Reuters reported that the United States delegation left at the beginning of the Iranian president’s address. The US mission did not immediately explain the action publicly when Reuters sought comment.
The walkout demonstrated that diplomatic contact does not mean political relations have normalised. Washington and Tehran remain engaged in an active conflict and continue accusing each other of responsibility for regional instability.
Nevertheless, diplomacy often proceeds alongside symbolic confrontation. The substantive measure will be whether negotiating teams can narrow differences over military activity, sanctions, Iran’s nuclear programme and shipping through Hormuz.
What are the key takeaways from Pezeshkian’s UN address and renewed US-Iran diplomacy?
Iran’s position now contains two clearly identifiable components. Tehran says it will not surrender under military pressure, but it is willing to negotiate and has described a conditional route toward reopening Hormuz. Washington likewise maintains military leverage while acknowledging that negotiations are underway.
That represents more diplomatic movement than existed only days earlier, but it remains far short of a peace agreement. The core disputes over sanctions, nuclear restrictions, military deployments and regional security remain unresolved.
The next meaningful milestone would be a concrete confidence-building action. A partial maritime reopening, reduction in military activity or agreement on a negotiation timetable would demonstrate that contacts in New York are producing more than competing public statements.
Discover more from Business-News-Today.com
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
