Can Tehran negotiate with Washington While seeking to kill Trump?

Can Tehran seriously negotiate with Washington While seeking to kill Trump?

Fresh calls from Iran's leadership to avenge the killing of former Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei have raised new doubts over whether Tehran can pursue negotiations with Washington while simultaneously threatening retaliation against President Donald Trump.

The debate has exposed growing divisions within Iran's political establishment as diplomats continue exploring ways to rescue talks with the United States despite escalating military tensions.

Revenge or negotiations?

In a message issued following his father's burial, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei declared that revenge for the February 28 air strike that killed Ali Khamenei was "a national demand" and insisted it "will most certainly be carried out."

The statement was immediately endorsed by senior hardline figures, including judiciary chief Gholamhossein Mohseni-Ejei and former Revolutionary Guard commander Mohsen Rezaei, who argued that both Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu must face punishment.

Rezaei described retaliation as an essential part of the Islamic Revolution.

Contradiction at the heart of policy

The renewed threats have highlighted what many analysts see as a fundamental contradiction in Iranian policy.

While Tehran continues signalling that it is willing to negotiate with Washington over regional security and its nuclear programme, influential figures inside the regime are simultaneously insisting that revenge against the American president remains a national obligation.

The mixed messaging has prompted growing debate within Iran over whether those two positions can realistically coexist.

Critics question the strategy

Several reformist voices openly challenged the logic behind the government's approach.

Former nuclear negotiator Saeed Jalili defended revenge as a matter of national sovereignty, but reformist journalist Ahmad Zeidabadi questioned how Iran could seek an agreement with the United States while some officials continued discussing the assassination or prosecution of President Trump.

Others warned that allowing emotion to dictate policy could deepen Iran's international isolation.

The reformist news outlet Rouydad24 argued that worsening economic conditions, sanctions and declining public confidence posed a far greater threat to the country than symbolic calls for revenge.

Hardliners demand action

Not everyone believes the rhetoric should remain symbolic.

Political commentator Ehsan Salehi argued that Iran's security services should establish dedicated units to carry out revenge operations, insisting the term "revenge" had only one meaning.

Cleric Mohammad Fayyazi also urged the government to formally adopt retaliation as official state policy rather than allowing what he described as unnecessary diplomatic caution to delay action.

Peace talks face fresh uncertainty

The increasingly public disagreement comes as indirect negotiations between Tehran and Washington continue despite repeated military exchanges in recent weeks.

With senior Iranian figures demanding revenge while diplomats pursue dialogue, the latest statements raise fresh questions about whether meaningful negotiations can survive unless Tehran reconciles the conflicting messages coming from its own leadership.

For now, Iran appears to be trying to balance two competing objectives—keeping diplomatic channels open while satisfying hardliners demanding retribution—a strategy that may become increasingly difficult to sustain.

SOURCE