Iran to Trump: ‘We Are Ready for Talks, But Not Under Force’

Donald Trump went to the United Nations on Tuesday with a warning that Iran could be “annihilated”.

Masoud Pezeshkian arrived on Wednesday with photographs, accusations and a message for the American president: Iran is still standing.

If the UN General Assembly was expecting a diplomatic exchange of carefully ironed sentences, Pezeshkian brought something closer to a courtroom rebuttal.

He held up a photograph of Iran’s late Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who Iranian officials say was killed in the opening US-Israeli strikes on Iran.

He also displayed photographs of children killed in a strike on a school in Minab.

Then he turned his attention to Trump.

“The US president described us as terrorists. We have been the victims of terrorism,” Pezeshkian said.

His central message was unmistakable.

“We will never bow our head or bend at the knee.”

But beneath the defiance was a more complicated message.

Pezeshkian did not close the diplomatic door. Instead, he said Iran remained prepared for dialogue and negotiations, provided they were not conducted under threats or the language of force.

That combination, resistance on one hand and an invitation to talk on the other, became the defining tension of his address.

The Photograph That Changed the Tone

Pezeshkian began by putting the human cost of the war before the world’s diplomats. He held up the photograph of Khamenei, whom Tehran says was assassinated in the opening phase of the conflict.

He also displayed images of children killed in the Minab school strike. Iranian officials say more than 175 children and teachers were killed in that attack.

Other reporting has put the death toll at a different figure, so the precise number remains disputed.

Pezeshkian used the images to challenge the description of Iran as the aggressor.

“America and Israel attacked us,” he said, arguing that Iran had acted in self-defence.

The US delegation then walked out of the chamber as the Iranian president continued his address. Recall that two days ago, while Trump was making his address, the Iranian delegation also walked out of the Chamber.

The empty American seats became part of the spectacle. The argument was now being made not just by the man at the podium, but also by the people who had left it.

‘Those Who Are Terrorists Call Us Terrorists’

Pezeshkian directly rejected Trump’s description of Iran as a terrorist state. He accused Washington of what he called a “bullying mentality” and argued that sanctions and military pressure would strengthen, rather than break, Iranian resistance.

“Those who are terrorists and train terrorists call us terrorists,” he said.

He also questioned what he described as double standards in the international system.

His argument was especially pointed on Israel. “The nuclear weapon is in Israel, but the inspectors are in Iran,” he said. “Israel kills, but Iran is sanctioned.”

The remarks were part of a wider Iranian argument that international rules are being applied differently to different countries.

The United States and Israel reject Tehran’s framing of the conflict and have accused Iran of destabilising the region.

Iran’s Nuclear Programme: No Bomb, No Surrender

Pezeshkian also used the speech to defend Iran’s nuclear programme. He insisted that Iran’s nuclear ambitions are peaceful and that Tehran has the right to develop nuclear technology for energy and other civilian purposes.

But he also drew a firm line against abandoning what he described as Iran’s legitimate nuclear rights. His message was essentially: no nuclear weapons, but no surrender of peaceful nuclear technology either.

That position puts the nuclear question back at the centre of any possible US-Iran settlement.

For Washington, the concern is whether Iran could use its nuclear infrastructure to develop a weapon.

For Tehran, the argument is that peaceful nuclear technology should not become the privilege of a handful of powerful states.

Pezeshkian said there was no military solution to the nuclear dispute.

Then Came the Strait of Hormuz

And this is where the speech moved from rhetoric to something that could affect the rest of the world.

Pezeshkian warned against using the Strait of Hormuz as a tool of aggression against Iran.

The narrow waterway is one of the world’s most important energy routes. Iran has intermittently restricted traffic through the strait during the conflict, while the United States has imposed a naval blockade.

Pezeshkian argued that Iran could not accept other countries freely using the waterway while simultaneously using it to impose pressure on Tehran.

He warned that expanding the war would not create security. The stakes extend far beyond Iran.

Any prolonged disruption around Hormuz can affect oil supplies, shipping costs and fuel prices across the world.

For countries already struggling with high energy costs, another shock in the waterway could quickly become an economic story.

Gaza Was Not Forgotten

Pezeshkian also turned the UN spotlight towards Palestine. He described Gaza as an “open wound” on the conscience of the international community and argued that lasting peace in West Asia cannot be achieved without justice for Palestinians.

He linked the Palestinian crisis to what he sees as the failure of international institutions to prevent civilian suffering.

The message was familiar from Tehran, but the platform was significant.

Pezeshkian was not speaking only to Iran’s supporters. He was speaking to a hall filled with governments that have sharply different positions on Israel, Palestine and Iran.

But Then Pezeshkian Offered a Door

For all the fiery language, Pezeshkian did something important. He did not say diplomacy was finished. In fact, he said the opposite.

Addressing Trump directly, he said Iran was ready for “dialogue and diplomacy and negotiations”, but without accepting the language of force.

That matters because Trump’s own UN speech had contained a similar contradiction.

Trump threatened extreme action against Iran while also saying that American and Iranian representatives had held a productive meeting.

His envoys, Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner, had met Iranian officials for about three hours on the sidelines of the UN gathering.

Trump described the meeting positively.

Iranian officials, however, played down the significance, saying there had been nothing fundamentally new.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio also cautioned against describing the meeting as a major breakthrough.

So behind the public insults and threats, contacts are continuing.

The UN Speech Was Really Two Speeches

Pezeshkian’s address therefore had two faces. One was aimed at Trump’s threats. That Pezeshkian answered with defiance.

The other was aimed at diplomacy. That Pezeshkian answered with an invitation.

He told Trump that Iran could negotiate, but would not negotiate with a gun pointed at its head.

And then he returned to the line that will probably outlive much of the speech: “Yes, they did hit us, but we did not bend the knee.”

Whether that defiance eventually becomes the opening position for a negotiated settlement remains to be seen.

For now, the UN has witnessed an extraordinary exchange: Trump threatened Iran from the same podium a day earlier; Pezeshkian returned to answer him; the American delegation walked out; and yet both sides still appear to have channels open for talks.

Diplomacy, it seems, has not been killed.It is simply shouting from opposite ends of the room. ValidViewNetwork reports.