Reactions to the Rejection of Negotiations with the U.S.; From Questions About Alternative Solutions to Calls for Pezeshkian's Resignation

The latest statements from the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Republic, who rejected negotiations with the U.S. regarding the nuclear program and sanctions relief, have sparked a wave of reactions among political figures and the general public on social media; the first economic reaction was a surge of nearly three thousand tomans in the dollar rate in Iran. These reactions concern both the essence of his remarks and the potential consequences for Iran, as well as the situation of the government of Masoud Pezeshkian, who stated during the presidential elections that he would resign if he could not fulfill his promises. Ali Khamenei, who had asked officials about ten days ago to be cautious about who they 'deal' with, described negotiations with Donald Trump's government on Friday, February 8, as neither 'wise', 'intelligent', nor 'honorable', citing 'experience' as the reason. His reference was to the first Trump administration's withdrawal from the nuclear agreement known as the JCPOA between Iran and six world powers, which reduced Iran's oil exports, caused a surge in foreign currency prices, and placed the Islamic Republic under unprecedented economic pressure. While the Supreme Leader deemed negotiations with the U.S. 'ineffective in solving the country's problems', the U.S. President had recently expressed a willingness to engage in dialogue with Iranian parties several times. Several officials, including President Masoud Pezeshkian, also emphasized Iran's willingness to negotiate and the ease of verifying Trump's 'only request' to stop Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons. However, following this speech, Masoud Pezeshkian welcomed Khamenei's remarks by reciting a poem by Iqbal Lahori, and Mohammad Baqer Qalibaf, the Speaker of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, urged Pezeshkian to advance Khamenei's directive regarding the rejection of negotiations with the U.S. Khamenei's statements have led to criticisms directed at Pezeshkian's government, highlighting the government's lack of autonomy in the face of the Supreme Leader's orders and referring to the President as a 'logistics officer' in Iran, to the extent that some have even called for Pezeshkian's resignation. Among them, Mohammad Tadini, a physician, wrote to Pezeshkian, 'You are no longer a logistics officer; take your remaining dignity and resign and return to your noble profession of medicine.' Ali Nazari, a former parliament member and journalist, also noted that Pezeshkian's continued presidency offers no benefit to the people, stating, 'The President must be honest with the 17 million electoral supporters who voted with great hope; a dignified resignation is an action.' However, some have rejected the 'differentiation' of Masoud Pezeshkian compared to previous presidents, describing him as a 'validator' of Khamenei's positions, including journalist Mohammad Aghazadeh, who wrote, 'Pezeshkian expressed the same views in support of the Leader's positions that would have been expressed if Raisi were alive and Jalili had become President.' According to Aghazadeh, 'Those who speak of the differences among these three in decision-making either have a sick mind, are liars, or have interests.' Mahmoud Sadeghi, a former parliament member, described the situation after Khamenei's speech as follows: 'The day Babak Zanjani was freed and his network became active again, it could be guessed that instead of a policy of lifting sanctions, the policy of circumventing sanctions remains on the agenda.' Sadeghi referred to Babak Zanjani's extensive activities in helping the Iranian government circumvent sanctions in the late 2010s. Recently, it was reported that Babak Zanjani, who had been imprisoned since 2013 due to a large-scale corruption case involving the sale of oil by circumventing sanctions, was released. Nevertheless, some political figures within the government and close to the administration attempted to present different interpretations of Khamenei's remarks, and some analysts did not consider the Supreme Leader's public statements as 'the whole truth' in the political arena, emphasizing the importance of 'behind-the-scenes' political bargaining both domestically and internationally. For instance, Hessameddin Ashna, a former security figure active in cyberspace known for his ambiguous writings and allusions to political groups and rivals, tweeted that his 'reading' of Khamenei's remarks is that 'negotiation with the U.S. (should) be intelligent, wise, and honorable (and have an impact on solving the country's problems); reason? Experience!' This tweet also faced a strong backlash from value-oriented users and some figures close to Ali Khamenei, including Mehdi Fazeli, a member of the 'Preservation and Publication of Ali Khamenei's Works' office, who called it a 'clear distortion' of Khamenei's words. In this context, Amir Hossein Sabati, a parliament member and member of the Stability Front, also wrote on X that 'those who talk about negotiating with the U.S. are ignorant, foolish, and unacquainted with honor because negotiation has no impact on solving problems.' Others, such as political analyst Mohammad Mohajeri, have also referred to Khamenei's remarks as 'the final word,' while simultaneously emphasizing that 'the path should not be closed to the arguments of thinkers. What is in the minds of society may influence the decisions of the elders in the future.' Akbar Alami, a former parliament member, believes that he does not interpret Khamenei's remarks as a closure of negotiation but rather as part of a negotiation tactic that is expressed considering national interests and due to America's broken promises, implicitly aimed at achieving guaranteed preconditions related to win-win negotiations that are not conditional. Ahmad Zeidabadi, a journalist, emphasized that Khamenei's remarks were 'clearer and more explicit than to leave room for a second reading' and called for an alternative solution to the rejection of negotiations with the U.S. Zeidabadi raised the question of what the government's decision is after rejecting negotiations with the U.S., reminding that if the decision is to negotiate with Europeans, 'any potential agreement must necessarily be acceptable to the U.S. and also Israel' and 'the second path is despair of an agreement with Europe and moving towards changing the nuclear strategy with all its consequences, especially readiness for military confrontation.' According to Zeidabadi, if the government's decision is the second path, 'none of the supporters of negotiations will have a place in the government.' Meanwhile, many citizens on social media have held Khamenei responsible for Iran's future and the increasing tensions with the U.S. and the possibility of military action against the country, warning him that the cost of the words he easily utters will be heavy for the citizens of Iran and, of course, for the Islamic Republic itself.