Crossing Red Lines in Islamabad and the Leadership's Stern Response
Mehdi Khanalizadeh’s account of the hidden aspects of post-war negotiations (Part 2)
After the initial American approval of Iran's ten conditions, the negotiating team headed to Islamabad. However, during the rounds of dialogue, the course of the negotiations abruptly veered off track.
The American Assessment of the Iranian Team's Weaknesses
In Islamabad, the American side backtracked on its promises and announced its refusal to negotiate based on the ten conditions. At that exact moment, and contrary to the explicit written orders issued by the Leadership, the nuclear issue was brought to the discussion table! The Americans' assessment of the Iranian team was that they did not want the war to continue and desired to reach an agreement at any cost. As a result, the other party hardened its stance to blackmail Iran and extract greater concessions.
A Fierce Reaction from the Leader: "These Negotiations Are Illegitimate"
Following the conclusion of this round, reports were sent back to Tehran (one of which was penned by a prominent member of the negotiating team). The Leader showed a highly negative reaction accompanied by strong objection, stating explicitly: "You have committed a religious/legal violation (mukhalafa\ shar'iyya)," and declared that this path lacked legitimacy due to the nuclear file being raised and the failure to enforce the ten conditions.
The Justificatory Letter from the Supreme National Security Council
In response to this objection, a number of National Security Council members addressed a letter to the Leadership, expressing their concern over the state of the infrastructure and the continuation of the war, claiming that negotiations could not proceed without addressing the nuclear file. However, the subsequent reply to this letter put all doubts to rest...