Listen to the article
Iran Denies Trump’s Claims of Direct Talks Amid Escalating Tensions
Iran has forcefully rejected President Donald Trump’s assertions that negotiations are underway between Washington and Tehran to end the three-week-old conflict. Iranian officials characterized Trump’s statements as “fake news” designed to manipulate financial markets and provide political cover for the ongoing military campaign.
“Fake news is intended to manipulate financial and oil markets and to escape the quagmire in which America and Israel are trapped,” wrote Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Speaker of Iran’s parliament, in a post on social media platform X.
A senior Iranian official, speaking to reporters on condition of anonymity, confirmed that “no new developments have occurred” between the two nations. While acknowledging that the U.S. has continued to send messages through third countries, the official emphasized that Iran has merely reiterated its position without engaging in substantive dialogue.
“There aren’t any negotiations taking place. The Iranian side has simply communicated its conditions to them and even that has been done indirectly,” the official stated.
The war, which began on February 28 with a series of bombings and assassinations carried out by Israel and the U.S., has rapidly expanded into a regional conflict. Iranian officials maintain that any ceasefire must be comprehensive, covering Iran, Lebanon, and Iraq simultaneously, rather than resembling the agreement that ended the “12-Day War” in June 2025.
The conflict has already produced significant economic disruption, with Iran effectively controlling the strategic Strait of Hormuz, a vital shipping lane for global oil markets. Trump’s statements about negotiations led to an immediate rally in financial markets that had been thrown into turmoil since the conflict’s outbreak.
On Saturday, Trump had issued an ultimatum via his Truth Social platform, threatening to “hit and obliterate” Iranian power plants if the country did not “FULLY OPEN, WITHOUT THREAT, the Strait of Hormuz” within 48 hours. Iran quickly responded by threatening to target energy infrastructure throughout the Persian Gulf region if such attacks occurred.
By Monday, Trump had changed course, claiming that “GOOD AND PRODUCTIVE CONVERSATIONS” had taken place with Iranian officials over the previous two days. He later told reporters that his envoys, Jared Kushner and Steve Witkoff, had engaged in talks with Iran that “went perfectly” and resulted in “major points of agreement” on multiple issues.
The Iranian foreign ministry officially denied these claims, stating that Trump’s comments fell “within the framework of efforts to reduce energy prices and gain time to implement his military plans.” While rejecting direct talks, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmail Baghaei acknowledged that “messages from the US, sent via friendly countries to seek talks and end the war, were received and answered in line with Iran’s principles.”
The Iranian official who spoke anonymously described the U.S. messages as “difficult to assess,” noting they have “conveyed different points to each of the intermediary countries.” He added that while the U.S. has “expressed a willingness to halt operations,” these communications appear “primarily aimed at reassuring those countries and have not been taken seriously by the Iranian side.”
Meanwhile, regional tensions continue to escalate. Iranian ballistic missiles recently struck the Israeli cities of Arad and Dimona—the latter housing Israel’s primary nuclear facility—causing significant destruction to residential areas and resulting in approximately 180 casualties. Iran described these strikes as direct retaliation for an earlier attack on its Natanz nuclear enrichment facility.
Several Gulf states have hardened their positions against Iran. The United Arab Emirates Foreign Minister declared the country “will never be blackmailed by terrorists,” while Saudi Arabia expelled the Iranian military attaché and four embassy staff members. Senior Gulf diplomats have indicated that their goals extend beyond a ceasefire to include “curbing the nuclear threat, missiles, drones, and the bullying of the straits.”
As the conflict intensifies, the Iranian official stated that Tehran will not abandon its ballistic missile program, which it considers a deterrent against future aggression. He also indicated that Iran would pursue compensation for damages inflicted during the war and formulate “a new doctrine concerning its nuclear industry” in response to attacks on its nuclear facilities.
The Treasury Department has temporarily lifted sanctions on Iranian oil exports in an attempt to stabilize global markets—a move that Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has characterized as “jujitsuing the Iranians” and “using their own oil against them,” despite the financial benefits it provides to Tehran.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.


11 Comments
Interesting development with Iran rejecting Trump’s claims of direct talks. Seems like a clear attempt to manipulate markets and provide cover for the military action. Transparency is important in these high-stakes geopolitical situations.
I agree, the Iranian official’s statement that there are no substantive negotiations taking place seems credible. Trying to create a false impression of diplomacy is concerning.
The Speaker of Iran’s parliament calling Trump’s statements ‘fake news’ designed to manipulate markets is a strong rebuke. It reinforces the perception that the US administration is not being fully transparent about the situation.
You’re right, this back-and-forth around direct talks raises questions about the true nature of the conflict and the motivations of the parties involved. Clarity would be helpful for assessing the risks.
The contradictory statements from the US and Iran raise red flags. Investors and the public deserve a clear, truthful account of the situation rather than what appears to be political posturing and market manipulation.
The Iranian official’s confirmation that they’ve only communicated their position indirectly, without engaging in real dialogue, suggests the Trump administration’s claims may indeed be misleading. Geopolitical tensions like this can certainly impact commodity markets.
It’s concerning to see attempts at market manipulation during a time of heightened geopolitical risk. Both sides should prioritize transparency and factual communication to help reduce uncertainty and volatility.
I agree, open and honest dialogue is essential, particularly when it comes to issues that can significantly impact the global economy and financial markets.
This situation highlights the importance of verifying claims, especially when they have the potential to affect financial markets. Reliable, fact-based information is crucial for investors and the public to make informed assessments.
This dispute over direct talks highlights the need for independent verification of claims, especially when they involve sensitive geopolitical and economic issues. Maintaining trust in the accuracy of information is crucial.
Absolutely. With so much at stake, all sides should focus on providing transparent, fact-based updates to the public rather than engaging in what seems to be propaganda or disinformation.