Iran claims US sought talks 20 days after demanding ‘unconditional surrender’
Web Desk
|
11 Aug 2026
TEHRAN: Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi has claimed that the United States approached Iran for negotiations nearly 20 days after the start of the war, despite US President Donald Trump’s reported demand for Tehran’s “unconditional surrender” in the early days of the conflict.
Speaking at a press conference broadcast on Iranian state television, Araghchi said Trump had initially posted two words on social media — “unconditional surrender” — while Washington was demanding that Iran fully capitulate.
According to the Iranian foreign minister, the situation changed within a few weeks, with the United States subsequently contacting Iran and requesting negotiations.
Araghchi said the development demonstrated that Iran had not surrendered to US pressure during the conflict and had remained firm on its position.
He further claimed that Iran had demonstrated itself to the world as a “tough and undefeated power” during the recent war.
Araghchi said foreign ministers and officials from several countries had told him that Iran’s resistance had surprised the international community, as few had expected Tehran to withstand US pressure for such an extended period.
He maintained that Iran continued to resist despite the United States receiving support from Israel, Western countries and several other nations.
The Iranian foreign minister also said the conflict had demonstrated that it would be difficult to force Iran to accept demands through military pressure.
Araghchi’s remarks come as major differences remain between Tehran and Washington over the end of the conflict, Iran’s nuclear programme and the situation in the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran has repeatedly maintained that any negotiations must respect its sovereignty and national interests, while the United States has continued to press its demands concerning Tehran’s nuclear programme and regional activities.
There was no immediate detailed response from the United States to Araghchi’s claims.
Comments
0 comment