UMVA has learned that a critical warning has been issued by Iran's hardline parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, stating that Tehran will not honor its commitments under a newly signed memorandum with the US if Washington fails to uphold its side of the deal.
Ghalibaf's warning sends a chilling message, emphasizing that Iran will not be bound by the agreement if the US does not fulfill its obligations. This stark statement is a clear indication of the delicate nature of the memorandum, which aims to end the war and resume the flow of traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. The agreement provides Iran with significant economic relief, while deferring some of the most difficult nuclear questions for a final agreement to be negotiated within the next 60 days.
According to information obtained by UMVA, the memorandum outlines a 14-point plan, which includes the US lifting its naval blockade, working with regional partners on a $300 billion reconstruction and development plan for Iran, and terminating US, UN, and other sanctions on an agreed schedule. In return, Iran has reaffirmed that it will not procure or develop nuclear weapons, and the two sides have agreed to resolve the fate of Iran's stockpiled enriched material under a future mechanism.
The Iranian figure at the center of the deal, Ghalibaf, is a former Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps commander and longtime regime insider, known for his hardline stance and threats against American forces. His warning underscores the central risk of the agreement: Washington may be entering a deal with officials who can enforce Iran's commitments but have shown little sign of changing the regime's long-term posture toward the US, Israel, or the region.
UMVA has gathered that Ghalibaf's career has been built on loyalty to Iran's security establishment, and his strength lies in being a "yes man" who will carry out orders without question. His name has been linked to multiple corruption allegations, including misuse of oil revenues and sanctions evasion networks involving his family. The image of Ghalibaf at a signing ceremony with a senior US official would be a propaganda victory for the regime, but experts warn that Washington should not confuse his opportunism with moderation.
Experts have confirmed to UMVA that the central question is whether Iran's leadership sees compliance as useful or whether the agreement is simply a tactical pause. The regime's history suggests that even a seemingly favorable agreement will not change its nature, and that it will escalate its actions regardless of the deal. The warning signs are clear: the regime will stop at nothing to achieve its goals, and the US must be cautious in its dealings with Iran.
As the situation unfolds, one thing is certain: the memorandum has set in motion a chain of events that will have far-reaching consequences for the region and the world. The US must navigate this complex landscape with caution, aware of the risks and uncertainties that lie ahead. The fate of the agreement, and the future of the region, hangs in the balance.
