Iran's supreme leader gave govt 'certain authorities' over peace talks with US

Granting the government “certain powers” means Iran’s Supreme Leader has authorized officials to take steps in negotiations that may normally require his approval. The move matters because it gives the government greater room to respond quickly while talks with the United States remain sensitive.

President Masoud Pezeshkian said Mojtaba Khamenei had conferred these powers on the government. Iran’s foreign ministry also said Tehran was exchanging messages with Washington through mediators. Together, these developments show an official channel for diplomacy, even though the article does not describe the exact authority granted.

The practical effect depends on how Iranian officials use that authority and whether Washington responds. Iran has proposed reopening the Strait of Hormuz and resuming nuclear talks, but only if the United States meets its demands. The announcement therefore creates an opening for negotiations without confirming an agreement.

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow maritime passage used by ships entering and leaving the Gulf region. It matters because disruption there can affect the movement of energy and other goods. In the article, reopening the strait is tied directly to diplomacy between Iran and the United States.

Iran proposed a two-day plan to reopen the strait and resume nuclear talks. Ships would have to use a route agreed by Iran and Oman and travel under Iranian supervision. This makes reopening conditional, rather than an unconditional return to normal shipping. Iran also wants sanctions and the US blockade on its ports addressed.

The proposal could turn control of a major shipping route into leverage at the negotiating table. Iran says the plan is still a basis for talks through mediators. However, the article says Washington has not indicated whether it accepts the terms, so the strait’s status remains uncertain.

The Strait of Hormuz carries roughly one-fifth of the world’s petroleum consumption, according to widely used estimates from international energy analysts. It also handles a major share of global liquefied natural gas shipments. The exact amount changes with production, demand, and shipping patterns, so the figure is an approximation rather than a fixed total.

This volume makes the strait strategically important. Oil and gas tankers use it to move energy from Gulf producers toward global markets. A closure, restriction, or requirement to follow specially controlled routes could delay deliveries and raise concern among buyers, traders, and governments.

The article does not state a percentage, but it highlights the strait’s importance by making its reopening a condition in Iran’s proposed deal. Iran wants shipping restored under an agreed route and its supervision. Whether that plan affects global energy flows depends on US acceptance and the wider diplomatic situation.

Iran has tied two actions to a wider set of political and economic conditions. It says the Strait of Hormuz could reopen and nuclear talks with Washington could resume if the United States meets Tehran’s demands. The proposal therefore links shipping, diplomacy, sanctions, and regional fighting.

The reported conditions include lifting the US blockade on Iranian ports, removing sanctions on Iranian oil sales, and agreeing to a ceasefire that also covers Lebanon. For shipping, vessels would follow a route agreed by Iran and Oman and travel under Iranian supervision. Iran’s foreign ministry said the proposal remained the basis for negotiations through mediators.

The plan’s timeline was shortened from seven days to two. That signals a faster proposed implementation, but not a completed agreement. Iranian spokesperson Esmail Baghaei did not say whether Tehran had changed its demands, and Washington had not indicated whether it accepted them. The conditions therefore remain bargaining positions.

If the Strait of Hormuz remained closed, ships would be unable to use the route normally, potentially disrupting energy deliveries and other commercial traffic. Because the strait is a major global energy passage, prolonged disruption could place pressure on supplies and markets. The article does not provide forecasts or quantify possible price changes.

Iran’s proposal illustrates the mechanism. Ships would need to use a route agreed by Iran and Oman and travel under Iranian supervision if the strait reopened. Without such an arrangement, shipping could remain restricted. Iran is using access to the route alongside demands about ports, oil sanctions, and a regional ceasefire.

The security consequences could extend beyond shipping. The article describes uncertainty about renewed fighting and says President Donald Trump has alternated between diplomacy and threats of heavy bombing. Continued closure could therefore complicate negotiations and deepen regional instability, while reopening could create space for nuclear talks.

Mediators can carry messages between governments when direct talks are politically difficult or when trust is limited. They allow each side to communicate positions, test possible compromises, and reduce the pressure of face-to-face bargaining. The article does not identify the specific reason Iran and the United States chose this method.

Iran’s foreign ministry said Tehran was exchanging messages with Washington through mediators. It also said the proposed plan remained the basis for negotiations through mediators. Oman has a practical role in the proposal because Iran says ships using the reopened strait would follow a route agreed by Iran and Oman.

This arrangement keeps diplomacy active while leaving major questions unresolved. Iran has not confirmed that its demands changed, and Washington has not said it accepted them. Mediated talks may help prevent immediate escalation, but they do not guarantee an agreement on the strait, sanctions, nuclear discussions, or a ceasefire.

Economic sanctions are government restrictions designed to limit another country’s trade, financial activity, or access to specific markets. They can impose economic costs without direct military action. In this case, the article refers specifically to US sanctions affecting Iranian oil sales, as well as a US blockade on Iranian ports.

Lifting those restrictions can become a bargaining tool because it offers Iran measurable economic relief. Tehran reportedly wants sanctions on its oil exports removed, while also seeking the blockade’s removal, a ceasefire covering Lebanon, and conditions for reopening the strait. Washington could consider such relief as part of a negotiated exchange, though the article does not say it has done so.

The proposal shows how economic and security issues are connected. Iran links oil access and port access to shipping and nuclear talks. Esmail Baghaei said the proposal remained the basis for negotiations, but neither changed demands nor US acceptance was confirmed. Sanctions relief therefore remains a demand, not an achieved result.