Iranian Officials Reject Trump Claims on Uranium Concessions Amid April 8 Ceasefire Deadline

United States President Donald Trump’s announcements about securing major concessions from Tehran triggered immediate pushback inside Iran, with Iranian authorities and establishment backers rejecting his claims as negotiations approached a deadline tied to a two-week ceasefire reached on April 8.

In his remarks on Friday, Trump said Iran and the US would jointly dig up the enriched uranium buried under the rubble of bombed Iranian nuclear sites and transfer it to the US, and he claimed Iran had agreed to stop enriching uranium on its soil.

@mathrubhumi

Trump also asserted that the Strait of Hormuz had been opened and would never be closed again, while the US naval blockade of Iran’s ports remained in place and sea mines were removed or were in the process of being removed.

He further emphasized that Iran would not receive billions of dollars of its own frozen assets abroad due to US sanctions, and he said the 10-day ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon was completely unrelated to Iran.

By Saturday noon, the Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) released a statement saying the Strait of Hormuz is once again heavily restricted and under “strict management” of the armed forces.

The IRGC statement cited continued “acts of piracy and maritime theft under the so-called label of a blockade” by Washington as the reason for the restrictions.

Iran’s Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf rejected Trump’s claims outright, framing them as lies and insisting they would not advance negotiations.

The Al Jazeera report says Ghalibaf, who led the Iranian delegation to the Islamabad talks earlier this month, posted on X early on Saturday: “With these lies, they did not win the war, and they certainly will not get anywhere in negotiations either,”.

Al Jazeera

In the same reporting window, the IRGC’s Khatam al-Anbiya Central Headquarters issued its own counter-statement, saying the Strait of Hormuz was “once again heavily restricted” and under “strict management” of the armed forces.

The Oz Arab Media version of the story likewise says Ghalibaf “dismissed Trump’s statements as lies,” and it repeats that the IRGC quickly countered Trump’s assertions about the Strait.

While Trump claimed the strait was “fully open,” the Los Angeles Times account says Iranian officials and state media asserted that conditions remained on passage, including “the imposition of tolls and coordination with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.”

A Los Angeles Times “top aide to Iran’s president” also dismissed Trump’s messaging, saying “The conditional and limited reopening of a portion of the Strait of Hormuz is solely an Iranian initiative, one that creates responsibility and serves to test the firm commitments of the opposing side,” and adding, “If they renege on their promises,” “they will face dire consequences.”

The dispute over the Strait of Hormuz spilled into public arguments inside Iran’s state media ecosystem, with multiple hosts and analysts attacking Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi after he tweeted about the waterway’s status.

Al Jazeera reports that on Friday, multiple state television hosts and analysts harshly attacked Araghchi because he tweeted that the Strait of Hormuz was “declared completely open for the remaining period of ceasefire, on the coordinated route as already announced by Ports and Maritime Organisation”.

One of the hosts demanded Araghchi must immediately clarify, while another said the top diplomat’s tweet was in English and since the Iranian people do not have access to X due to the state-imposed near-total internet shutdown for seven weeks, the message was not directed at the people.

Al Jazeera also describes a furious presenter on state television’s Channel 3, with a Hezbollah flag in the background, claiming Araghchi was somehow “the representative of the people of Lebanon, Yemen and Iraq” because they are a part of Iran’s “axis of resistance” of armed forces, so he should demand concessions on their behalf from Trump.

The Oz Arab Media account similarly says calls for clarification from Araghchi increased as state-affiliated media echoed confusion among the public.

In parallel, Al Jazeera describes a “haze of confusion” among establishment supporters in the hours between Trump’s announcements and official responses, including Ezzatollah Zarghami asking, “Is there no Muslim out there to talk to the people a bit about what is happening?!” and Alireza Zakani warning that if Trump’s claims are true, the Iranian establishment must beware “not to gift the vile enemy in negotiations what it failed to achieve in the field”.

Different outlets framed the same core claims—Trump’s assertions about uranium concessions and the Strait of Hormuz—through distinct emphases, producing a patchwork of narratives about what Iran is willing to accept.

Al Jazeera centers the internal Iranian reaction, describing how Trump’s announcements “riled supporters of the Iranian establishment” and how Tehran’s authorities issued rejections and clarifications, including the IRGC’s “strict management” language and Ghalibaf’s “With these lies” post.

Al Jazeera

Los Angeles Times, by contrast, focuses on the emergence of “outlines of an agreement” and describes Trump’s public messaging that the strait was “fully open,” while Iranian officials and state media said conditions remained, including “the imposition of tolls and coordination with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.”

The Los Angeles Times account also quotes a top aide dismissing Trump’s contours as “baseless,” and it adds a separate political thread about Trump denying an Axios report involving “$20 billion in frozen Iranian assets” in exchange for Tehran handing over fissile material.

Oz Arab Media, meanwhile, largely reproduces the Al Jazeera storyline in Arabic, emphasizing that Ghalibaf “dismissed Trump’s statements as lies” and that the IRGC countered Trump’s assertions about the Strait being opened and “would never be closed again.”

Hindustan Times introduces a different angle by focusing on Trump’s framing of enriched uranium as a “crowning jewel,” and it says Tehran “has firmly rejected any attempt to transfer what it calls its “sacred” nuclear stockpile.”

The sources portray the immediate stakes as tied to the Strait of Hormuz, the fate of enriched uranium, and the political consequences of any deal—or failure to reach one.

Al Jazeera describes Trump’s claims as coming “just days left on a two-week ceasefire reached on April 8,” and it notes that the IRGC attributed the Strait restrictions to Washington’s “acts of piracy and maritime theft” under the label of a blockade.

Anadolu Ajansı

Los Angeles Times adds that Iranian diplomats posted threats that closure could resume “at any time of their choosing,” and it warns that restrictions would return unless the United States agreed to lift a blockade of its ports, while also quoting a top aide’s warning that “If they renege on their promises,” “they will face dire consequences.”

The Los Angeles Times account also brings in the global energy dimension through IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol, who is quoted as painting “a sobering picture of the global repercussions” of what he called “the largest energy crisis we have ever faced,” stemming from the pinch-off of oil, gas and other vital supplies through the Strait of Hormuz.

In parallel, the Crypto Briefing piece frames the uranium dispute through a verification lens, stating “The IAEA has called for strict verification,” and it says the two sides remain far apart on terms, while urging watchers to look for “any US-Iran joint communique after the talks.”

Finally, Al Jazeera Net’s separate discussion of Iran’s leadership succession argues that the “Venezuela option was never likely” because “the absence of an acceptable Iranian partner willing and able to advance and lead” makes a Caracas-style scenario impossible, while Barbara Slavin says “Iran is not Venezuela, and the successor to Khamenei is likely to be a nationalist hardliner who is very weak, making a settlement unlikely.”