Iran keeps Strait of Hormuz closed until US meets terms, parliament speaker says

Conditions for reopening the Strait of Hormuz

Iranian parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf announced that the Strait of Hormuz will remain closed until Tehran's demands are satisfied and the United States fulfills its commitments. Speaking at the opening of a parliamentary session on the eve of Sacred Defence Week, Ghalibaf asserted that maritime access will not be restored without the formal recognition of Iran's national rights. The closure of the waterway was enacted as a retaliatory measure following joint military strikes carried out by the United States and Israel against Iranian territory on 28 February. Ghalibaf, who acts as the primary Iranian negotiator in periodic peace talks with Washington, stated that returning to previous negotiating terms remains impossible until these conditions are met.

As long as these conditions are not met, the legitimate rights of the Iranian nation are not recognized, and the commitments of the Americans are not implemented, there will be no room to return to the previous negotiation conditions and to open the Strait of Hormuz.

Doctrine of combined warfare and negotiation

Addressing the assembly, Ghalibaf rejected the notion that armed conflict and diplomatic engagement represent opposing paths. He argued that Tehran must simultaneously employ military power and diplomatic channels to defend its sovereignty. Under this framework, Iran intends to deploy its available military strength to strike enemy forces and repel attacks, while utilizing diplomacy to consolidate battlefield gains once significant operational victories are secured. Ghalibaf explained that this sequence is designed to establish sustainable deterrence, impose defeat on adversaries, and strengthen Iran's long-term geopolitical standing across the Middle East.

The dichotomy between war and negotiation is not real, one must both fight and negotiate: fight with wisdom and authority, and negotiate with authority and rationality when the time is right.

Diplomatic channels and core disputes

Ghalibaf stated that Iranian negotiators have conveyed their core requirements directly to the opposing side using international mediators. He described Tehran's diplomatic platform as rational, explicit, and non-negotiable, stating that adversaries must abandon attempts at deception and unilateral imposition. While Ghalibaf did not publicly detail the exact list of requirements during his parliamentary speech, the terms governing the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and post-war maritime navigation stand as the primary obstacles in discussions regarding a permanent ceasefire. Because the passage functions as one of the world's most critical transit corridors for crude oil, the protracted blockade has created severe disruptions across global energy markets.

Strategic divisions within the political elite

The parliamentary speaker also openly addressed internal political friction within Iran, pointing to two competing strategic miscalculations among the country's governing elite. The first miscalculation involves political factions that advocate continuing the conflict indefinitely without establishing a clear mechanism, diplomatic horizon, or defined endpoint for its conclusion. Ghalibaf warned that this approach threatens to subject the nation to prolonged attrition and unending warfare. Conversely, he criticized a second faction that underestimates Iran's national strength, perceives the state as inherently vulnerable, and advocates surrender out of fear of foreign adversaries. Ghalibaf asserted that steadfast popular resistance will instead secure national safety and help shape a new regional and global order.