Iran on Monday officially denied allegations that the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps was engaged in back-channel talks with the U.S. via Kurdish intermediaries in Iraq, maintaining Tehran’s harsh stance against negotiations without concessions as the war continues.
Hossein Mohebi, a spokesperson for the IRGC, on Monday denied reports that it was conducting back-channel discussions with the White House. He implied that President Trump, who confirmed the conversations to Fox News this week, was working to manipulate oil markets with his remarks.
“This lie by Trump is nothing more than fantasies brought on by the delusions and nightmares he is suffering from as a result of defeat and desperation in the war,” Mr. Mohebi told state-affiliated media outlet Tasnim.
Axios reported on Sunday that Nechirvan Barzani, president of Iraqi Kurdistan, has been in direct contact with the Trump administration since May and has served as a go-between for Washington and the IRGC.
Mr. Barzani’s office confirmed on Sunday that the president was working to ease tensions between the two sides, but did not say if he had played a role in peace negotiations and said his country remained neutral in the conflict.
On Monday morning, Kurdistan’s Prime Minister Masrour Barzani, the president’s cousin, and the private residence of the region’s security agency chief were targeted by drones launched from Iranian territory.
There were no casualties or major damage reported from the strikes and Iran has not claimed responsibility.
Monday also marked the end of the 60-day ceasefire and negotiation period outlined in the Pakistani-mediated Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, signed by the U.S. and Iran in June.
But the ceasefire agreement and the memorandum in general have been ignored since July, when the U.S. and Iran resumed strikes over differing interpretations of the deal’s provisions regarding the Strait of Hormuz.
Iran’s Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Esmail Baghaei on Monday confirmed that the deal is no longer relevant for diplomatic relations between the U.S and Iran.
“The memorandum provided for a 60-day period of talks on two issues: sanctions relief and the nuclear issue. If no agreement was reached within those 60 days, the period could be extended,” he told reporters during a daily press conference. “We did not begin negotiations because a few weeks after the memorandum, the U.S. began seriously violating its terms.”
The U.S. and Iran held one round of direct negotiations in Switzerland in June. The talks were intended to set the stage for long-term technical talks that eventually fell through once Iran attacked commercial shipping in the Strait of Hormuz and the U.S. retaliated.
Since the war restarted, Iran has maintained a hard line against restarting talks unless the U.S. agrees to significant concessions. The demands include the removal of the U.S. naval blockade, comprehensive sanctions relief and a regional ceasefire.
Washington, for its part, has in turn demanded that there can be no agreement with Iran while the Strait of Hormuz, a narrow waterway connecting the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman, remains closed.
Iran closed the strait in March after the U.S. and Israel launched joint strikes on political and military targets in the country. At least one-fifth of the world’s oil and natural gas supply passes through the waterway each year, and its closure has driven up international energy prices.
The average U.S. price of gas stood at $4.06 per gallon on Monday, a 36% increase from when the war began, according to the AAA motor club.
The average price was $3.14 per gallon at this time of the year in 2025.
Last week, commercial traffic in the strait dropped approximately 19.5% compared to the week prior, the maritime analytics service MarineTraffic reported on Monday. Of the 95 ships that transited the waterway, at least 50 used the Iranian Unilateral Scheme, meaning they sailed through Iranian-controlled waters.
Iran is currently engaged in direct talks with Oman, the sultanate that borders the strait, to determine a framework for future control over the waterway. Testimonials from Iranian and Omani officials indicate that the deal would open temporary routes for commercial vessels, potentially easing energy prices.
The deal could also include tolls, couched as service fees, levied on commercial tankers passing through the strait. The U.S. and other Western nations have frequently rejected plans that would allow Iran to generate revenue with the Strait of Hormuz, citing international law.
But Iranian officials have also said the waterway would likely not open without the removal of the U.S. naval blockade and Western vessels may be permanently barred regardless of the war’s status.
It remains unclear what role Washington is playing in the Oman-Iran discussions, though U.S. officials say that they are very aware of the details of the negotiations. Mr. Trump on Monday implied that Washington was in complete control and threatened to strike Oman if it did not obey.
“If Oman gets in the way, we’ll bomb the s—- out of them,” Mr. Trump told Fox News’ Trey Yingst.
Contact the author
Please read our comment policy before commenting.