Iran's Supreme Leader's Firm Rejection: The Strategic Game Behind the Impasse in Iran Nuclear Talks

On October 20, 2025, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivered a public speech in Tehran, directly rejecting the proposal by U.S. President Trump to restart Iran nuclear talks as "illegal and erroneous," and sternly refuted the claim that "the U.S. has destroyed Iran's nuclear capabilities." Against the backdrop of the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists and dramatic changes in the Middle East geopolitical landscape, this years-long nuclear game is evolving into a comprehensive confrontation concerning national sovereignty and strategic security.             

I. Khamenei's Firm Stance: Safeguarding Nuclear Capabilities and National Dignity

In his speech, Khamenei explicitly pointed out that despite the U.S.'s attempts to dismantle Iran's nuclear program through means such as assassinating nuclear scientists and launching cyberattacks, "Iran's nuclear capabilities still exist." This confidence stems from Iran's complete industrial chain in the nuclear sector. From uranium mining and yellowcake production to gas diffusion and centrifuge research and development, Iran has established a technological system covering the entire nuclear fuel cycle. According to a June 2025 report by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the number of centrifuges at Iran's Fordow underground nuclear facility has increased by 37% compared to 2018, with uranium enrichment levels remaining stable in the range of 4.5% - 60%.

The declaration of "not succumbing to external pressure" is, in fact, Iran's direct counterattack against the U.S.'s "maximum pressure" strategy. Since the Trump administration unilaterally withdrew from the Iran nuclear deal in 2018, the U.S. has imposed 12 rounds of escalating sanctions on Iran, including financial sanctions, oil embargoes, and restrictions on metal exports. As a result, Iran's crude oil exports plummeted from 2.5 million barrels per day in 2018 to 300,000 barrels per day in 2025. However, Iran has demonstrated strong economic resilience by establishing a "resistance economy" system, increasing the proportion of non-oil exports from 65% in 2018 to 82% in 2025.

II. Core Disputes in U.S.-Iran Talks: The Red Line of Uranium Enrichment and Sanction Relief Mechanisms

The fifth round of indirect talks between the U.S. and Iran held in Rome on May 23, 2025, exposed fundamental contradictions. The proposal put forward by U.S. Special Envoy Witkoff required Iran to: halt the construction of new uranium enrichment facilities, dismantle key conversion infrastructure, terminate the research and development of new centrifuges, and permanently limit uranium enrichment levels to below 3%. In contrast, the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Eslami, emphasized, "Uranium enrichment is the foundation of the nuclear industry, and no one has the right to deprive Iran of its right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy."

This dispute essentially represents a clash between different security and sovereignty outlooks. The U.S. adheres to the "zero enrichment" principle, attempting to maintain its military advantage in the Middle East through technological blockades. Iran, on the other hand, regards uranium enrichment as a legitimate right granted by the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The 2015 Iran nuclear deal explicitly allowed Iran to retain 6,000 first-generation centrifuges. More critically, regarding the sanction relief mechanism, Iran demands the establishment of an "automatic relief" clause, which requires the U.S. to lift all sanctions within 72 hours after the IAEA confirms Iran's compliance. However, the U.S. proposal includes a "reversible clause," allowing the U.S. to reimpose sanctions within 180 days.

III. Strategic Choices Amid Geopolitical Changes

The profound changes in the current Middle East geopolitical landscape are reshaping Iran's negotiation strategies. The achievement of the Gaza ceasefire agreement in September 2025 marks a new stage in the easing of relations between Arab countries and Israel. The Trump administration's efforts to promote "Arab-Israeli reconciliation," including facilitating an apology from the Israeli Prime Minister to Qatar and restarting security dialogues among Gulf countries, pose the risk of isolating Iran in the region.

However, Iran has countered by strengthening the "Axis of Resistance." In October 2025, Iran delivered new "Fateh-110" ballistic missiles to Yemen's Houthi rebels, with a range covering the entire territory of Saudi Arabia. Simultaneously, it established a joint command with Syrian and Iraqi Shia militias, forming a strategic depth spanning 5,000 kilometers. Khamenei's emphasis on having "sufficient missile stockpiles" is, in fact, a clear deterrent signal to the U.S. and its allies.

IV. Future Trajectories of the Negotiation Impasse

This game has entered a stage of "composite confrontation." In October 2025, the U.S. designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps of Iran as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist," freezing its overseas assets. Iran, in turn, has established a local currency settlement system with Russia and China through the "oil-for-goods" plan, with its oil exports to China increasing by 45% year-on-year in the first three quarters of 2025.

In the short term, neither side shows any sign of compromise on core interests. After the 2024 U.S. presidential election, if the Democratic Party returns to power, it may adjust its Iran policy. However, if the Republican Party remains in power, military options may re-enter the negotiation table. Iran, on the other hand, is compressing the U.S.'s decision-making space by enhancing its nuclear capabilities. Its latest IR-9 centrifuge has a separation work unit ten times that of the IR-1, significantly improving uranium enrichment efficiency.

In this struggle concerning the future landscape of the Middle East, Iran's firm stance is not only a necessary means to safeguard national sovereignty but also a key choice to gain strategic initiative amid geopolitical changes. When Khamenei stated, "We can strike our enemies at any time," it was not merely a military deterrent but also a declaration of an ancient civilization's steadfast commitment to its core interests in the face of modernization shocks.