Press TV, on Iran, 27 October 2026

6.0out of 10Serious

No talks with US before Iran’s conditions are met: Senior lawmaker

Tap a highlight to see why it matters.1 finding

A senior Iranian lawmaker says the Islamic Republic will not negotiate with the United States unless Tehran’s seven conditions are met, warning that would prompt a stronger response and have consequences across the region.

Alaeddin Boroujerdi, a member of the Parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, made the remarks to Lebanon’s al-Mayadeen television channel in an exclusive interview on Monday.

Iran has communicated its conditions to the US through mediators towards resolving the issues surrounding the Strait of Hormuz.

The Islamic Republic closed the waterway following the launch of the American-Israeli aggression against the country on February 28. Iran and the US agreed on a 60-day reopening period as part of a Pakistan-mediated memorandum of understanding in June, but .

Tehran has previously named some of its conditions for reopening the chokepoint as cessation of aggression on all fronts, , and unfreezing of Iran’s frozen assets.

‘Iran to tighten conditions if US launches another war’

According to Boroujerdi, Iran’s conditions would become more stringent if Washington resumed the aggression.

He said the Islamic Republic’s missile stockpile has increased by “more than 50 percent,” while categorically ruling out surrendering the country’s enriched uranium.

Iran’s national security chief says not a single particle of enriched uranium will go outhttps://t.co/or1EbzSctA

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) October 20, 2026

“Some parties in Iran believe there is no point in adhering to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty if the United States does not abide by it,” he said.

‘Hormuz shipping faces new reality’

The legislator said Oman had agreed to a new arrangement negotiated with Iran concerning the Strait of Hormuz, but US pressure on Muscat prevented an expected joint statement from being issued.

Referring to , he warned that preventing Iran from exporting its oil would halt oil exports from the entire region.

Amid the overall situation affecting the Strait of Hormuz as a result of foreign aggression against the Islamic Republic, the lawmaker noted that “the navigation system in the Strait of Hormuz will not return to its previous status.”

🔴 Chief of the General Staff of Iran’s Armed Forces, Major General Ali Abdollahi inspects forces' readiness across the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz, and the Gulf of Oman: pic.twitter.com/B3EMyPEIOl

— Press TV 🔻 (@PressTV) October 26, 2026

‘Regional states have lost confidence in US’

The official hailed a recent quadrilateral meeting in Tehran involving representatives from Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and Turkey as a positive first step towards regional cooperation, saying the meeting involved a positive exchange of views.

According to Boroujerdi, the three states have announced their respective intentions to send security delegations to the Iranian capital.

He noted that regional countries had lost confidence in Washington’s ability to guarantee their security and were reassessing their policies.

He urged regional governments to understand that “the United States cannot help [them] provide their security,” adding that countries that established relations with the Israeli regime had miscalculated and would face the consequences.

Read the original article on presstv.ir (opens in a new tab)
What we found (1)

Press TV reports an interview with Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi and attributes most of his remarks clearly. In its own narration, though, it states Tehran's contested positions as settled fact: that the US blockade and sanctions are illegal, that US violations forced Iran to close Hormuz again, and that any renewed strike would be unprovoked aggression. No US, Omani or mediator account is set against any of these claims.

  1. States one side's claim as fact

    Serious

    “American violations forced Tehran to re-establish the closure”

    Why this matters
    Press TV states in its own voice that "American violations" of the June memorandum caused Iran to close the strait again.
    The impression it gives
    It is established that the US broke the Pakistan-mediated deal and that Iran's re-closure was a forced response.
    The context
    This is Tehran's account of why the reopening collapsed. The article names no violation, cites no mediator and gives no US or Pakistani account, yet it presents the claim without attribution.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“Iran has communicated its conditions to the US through mediators”

    Show it in the article

    “removal of an illegal naval blockade that the US has imposed on the country, lifting of illegal sanctions”

    Why this matters
    While listing Tehran's conditions, Press TV calls the blockade and the sanctions "illegal" in its own descriptive voice. It does not put the word inside Iran's stated position.
    The impression it gives
    The illegality of the blockade and sanctions is an established legal finding.
    The context
    The article cites no court, ruling or legal body for either judgement. It is Iran's legal position, and the outlet adopts it as its own.

    Show it in the article

    “the illegal American blockade targeting the Islamic Republic”

    Why this matters
    Press TV repeats "illegal" as its own description while introducing Boroujerdi's warning about oil exports.
    The impression it gives
    The blockade's illegality is background fact, not part of the lawmaker's argument.
    The context
    Nothing in the article supports a legal finding. A fair report would attribute the word to Boroujerdi or to Tehran.

    Show it in the article

    “renewed unprovoked aggression against the country”

    Why this matters
    The lead paraphrases the lawmaker but folds in "unprovoked aggression" with no quotation marks. The outlet's own summary sentence carries the verdict.
    The impression it gives
    Any future US or Israeli strike is already known to be unprovoked.
    The context
    Whether a hypothetical future strike would be provoked is not a fact the article can report. Elsewhere the article quotes Boroujerdi directly, but not on this point.

    How we know

    • Elsewhere in the article“if Washington resumed the aggression”

    Show it in the article

    Written straight

    Tehran says US violations of the June memorandum led it to reimpose the closure, and it describes the US naval blockade and sanctions as illegal. Washington's response was not reported.

Spot something we missed? Report this article

More from Press TV

  1. 27 OctIran6.0
  2. 27 OctIran0.0
  3. 26 OctVessels violating Iran’s protocols in southern waters will suffer damage: Top commander3.0
  4. 26 OctTehran quadrilateral meeting fruit of Iranian nation’s resistance and Armed Forces’ valor: Bagheri Kani7.3
  5. 26 OctLeader outlines roadmap for an ‘ever-stronger Iran,’ urges elites to break scientific boundaries0.0

Everything we scored from Press TV