Iran’s chief negotiator and parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, stated on Friday that the confrontation with the United States “will never end with Iran’s surrender” and that “only those prepared for war can negotiate with America.” The remarks, reported by Iranian state media and made during a meeting with the speaker of Indonesia’s upper house, came after a week of mutual military strikes that have imperilled a memorandum of understanding signed in mid-June to halt hostilities across the Middle East.

According to Iranian accounts, Ghalibaf told the Indonesian official that Tehran is ready for “total defence” should Washington violate the terms of the June agreement. He also disclosed that during earlier direct talks he had told US Vice President JD Vance that Iran has “no trust” in the United States. The Iranian position, as articulated by Ghalibaf, links the credibility of any diplomatic process to a demonstrated willingness to wage war, framing the resumption of negotiations as conditional on American adherence to the existing memorandum.

President Donald Trump, writing on his Truth Social platform on the same day, confirmed that the United States had agreed to further negotiations with Iran but asserted that the ceasefire was “OVER.” The exchange of fire this week — which Washington says began with Iranian attacks on commercial vessels in the Strait of Hormuz, followed by US strikes on targets inside Iran and Iranian drone and missile attacks on American-used bases in Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar and Jordan — has effectively suspended the 60-day negotiation window established by the memorandum. That 14-point accord, brokered by Pakistan with a key role for Qatar, had provided for the reopening of the strait, the easing of certain financial restrictions on Iran, and a framework for addressing Iran’s nuclear programme in future technical talks, alongside a ceasefire on all fronts.

A Qatari mediation delegation arrived in Tehran on Friday, local media reported, signalling that regional diplomatic efforts to salvage the process continue despite the public hardening of positions. Viewed from Western capitals, the sequence of events underscores the fragility of a de-escalation architecture that had produced only one round of direct talks in Switzerland and indirect technical meetings in Doha before the latest violence. The dossier now rests on whether the Qatari mission can bridge the gap between Washington’s insistence that the ceasefire has lapsed and Tehran’s demand that the original memorandum be respected as a precondition for further engagement.