Iran’s Foreign Ministry has directly rejected a new claim by U.S. President Donald Trump that “everyone in Iran has approved the deal,” including the country’s Supreme Leader. In a clear response reported by Iran’s Fars news agency, Iranian officials said that the premise of unanimous approval is false. According to the report, Iran’s official position is that nobody has accepted the proposed agreement and that no agreement has been reached at all.
The dispute centers on competing narratives about negotiations involving Iran and the United States. In recent political messaging, Trump has suggested that an Iran-related deal has been widely endorsed within Iran, implying that the Iranian leadership has already accepted the terms. Such a framing would indicate broad domestic consent and strengthen the impression that an agreement is settled. However, Iran’s Foreign Ministry response undermines that interpretation by insisting that approval did not occur and that the agreement is not finalized.
In the Foreign Ministry’s rejection, the statement specifically targets the assertion that Iran’s Supreme Leader is among those who have approved the deal. The Foreign Ministry, as described by the Fars report, denied that claim and emphasized that no one in Iran—explicitly including the highest religious-political authority—has accepted the proposed agreement. The ministry’s language, as summarized in the report, points to an absence of endorsement rather than merely disagreement over specific details.
Beyond denying domestic approval, Iran also reportedly addressed the condition for any potential agreement in the first place. The response indicates that if a deal is to happen, it would require the United States to accept all Iranian demands. This phrasing places the burden of concession on Washington rather than on Tehran. It also signals that Iran views negotiations as structured around its own requirements—particularly demands likely tied to sanctions relief, enforcement of terms, and broader commitments by the U.S.
This development is significant for several reasons. First, it clarifies that Iran does not consider the negotiation to be at an advanced or completed stage. When a head of state makes a public claim that “everyone” has approved a deal, it can create momentum and expectations that both sides have reached a final arrangement. By contrast, Iran’s denial suggests that the deal remains contested or nonexistent in official terms.
Second, the response indicates that Iran is attempting to control the narrative about its internal stance. Declarations about consensus—especially when invoked with reference to the Supreme Leader—can be politically powerful. By flatly rejecting the idea of unanimous internal approval, Iran’s Foreign Ministry is essentially saying that the U.S. has misrepresented Iran’s position or is overstating the status of negotiations.
Third, the mention that the U.S. must accept every Iranian demand helps define the likely sticking points in the negotiations. Even without the full list of demands being detailed in the news excerpt, the principle establishes that Iran expects comprehensive concessions. That suggests that any agreement would need to align closely with Iran’s red lines rather than with partial or conditional commitments.
The reported response also has implications for how future talks may proceed. If Iran believes that the U.S. has not accepted Iran’s requirements, then Iran has little incentive to recognize any deal prematurely. In negotiation environments where credibility and leverage are essential, declaring “no agreement has been reached” serves as a warning that progress claimed externally is not recognized domestically.
In addition, the language reported from Iran’s Foreign Ministry indicates that the rejection is not merely a response to a single statement but a reaffirmation of Iran’s negotiating stance. It suggests Iran is preparing for continued U.S. messaging that might claim milestones or internal approvals. By setting the record straight, Iranian officials aim to prevent confusion among international observers and supporters who might interpret U.S. claims as proof of a concluded deal.
The timing of the rejection also matters. When political leaders make strong public claims about approvals and agreements, the international community often treats them as signaling that negotiations have concluded. If those claims are contradicted by the other party, it can create diplomatic uncertainty and delay reliance on the supposed agreement. In this case, Iran’s response appears to negate that expectation by stating that an agreement has not been reached and that approval has not been granted.
Another key element is the role of Iran’s Foreign Ministry itself. A foreign ministry position carries official weight because it represents the government’s external diplomatic messaging and policy stance. That distinguishes the response from informal statements or commentary by non-government figures. By attributing the denial to the Foreign Ministry and referencing Iran’s internal leadership explicitly, the report indicates that Iran’s position is deliberate and institutional.
Moreover, the use of the “everyone” claim being rejected suggests Iran is also addressing exaggeration or miscommunication by the U.S. side. When a claim is broad—such as implying all of Iran has approved—any contradiction tends to have outsized political impact. Iran’s ministry response, as described, is not nuanced; it is categorical. This suggests that the ministry believes the U.S. claim is sufficiently inaccurate to warrant a direct and emphatic correction.
The report’s focus on the absence of approval and the absence of an agreement suggests the negotiation dynamics are still unresolved. It indicates that there are ongoing disagreements, outstanding conditions, or unmet requirements. The statement about U.S. acceptance of “every demand” further implies that negotiations are not simply about small adjustments; instead, Iran is positioning itself to require comprehensive alignment with its terms.
From a broader perspective, the reported developments reflect a familiar pattern in U.S.-Iran relations, where statements from U.S. leaders can be interpreted by opponents and observers as either strategic bargaining or unilateral declarations. Iran’s rejection shows that Tehran is unwilling to accept a fait accompli narrative—especially one that implies that Iran’s leadership already approved a deal.
The contradiction also matters for regional and global stakeholders that track U.S.-Iran negotiations closely. Many international parties base their assessments on official confirmations and the degree of consensus within the negotiating partner. If Iran says there is no agreement and no internal approval, then any external assumption about a finalized arrangement would be incorrect. That could affect policy planning by other governments and institutions.
Finally, the report underscores that political claims are contested in real time. The U.S. president’s statement (as reflected in the denial) implies a completed or nearly completed process, while Iran’s Foreign Ministry says the opposite. This suggests that the diplomatic battle may be fought not only through negotiation but also through public messaging, credibility, and controlling what counts as an “agreement.”
In conclusion, Iran’s Foreign Ministry has rejected President Trump’s claim that everyone in Iran approved a deal, including the Supreme Leader, and insisted that no one in Iran has accepted it and that no agreement has been reached. The ministry further stated that any agreement would require the United States to accept every Iranian demand. The update is reported by Fars, emphasizing Iran’s official stance that the deal status is not as the U.S. claims. Source: Fars.
The Hormuz Letter: BREAKING: Iran’s Foreign Ministry directly rejects Trump’s new claim that “everyone in Iran has approved the deal,” including the Supreme Leader, saying no one has accepted it, and “no agreement has been reached,” per Fars. Any agreement requires the US to “accept every demand”. #breaking
— @HormuzLetter May 1, 2026
SHOP AMAZON BEST SELLERS, CLICK TO BUY FROM AMAZON.
SHOP AMAZON BEST SELLERS, CLICK TO BUY FROM AMAZON.
