Iran parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf warns Tehran may not honor new US memorandum if Washington does not follow through

Iran’s parliament speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, identified by Fox News as a central hardline figure behind a newly signed memorandum with the United States, warned on June 18 that Tehran would not honor the agreement if Washington fails to uphold its obligations. The warning was issued in the context of the fresh understandings between the two governments and was framed as a conditional commitment tied to what Ghalibaf said the United States would deliver.

Fox News reported that Ghalibaf, who is also described as a key negotiator, said Iran would not implement or respect commitments contained in the memorandum if the Trump administration does not meet its side. The remarks, as characterized by the outlet, were aimed at setting expectations inside Iran’s political institutions and indicating that the deal’s durability would depend on continued compliance by the United States.

The comments come as Iran’s hardline parliamentary bloc seeks to assert influence over how any bilateral understanding is carried out and whether it is binding in practice. According to Fox News, Ghalibaf presented himself as an architect of the approach that led to the memorandum, and he used the question of US follow-through as the main condition for Iranian implementation.

The outlet also characterized the memorandum as newly signed, but did not include in its description the specific terms or timeline for the arrangement in the material provided. As a result, details such as which obligations are contingent, what mechanisms govern verification, and whether any enforcement or dispute process exists were not established in the available record.

Even with limited specifics in the report, Ghalibaf’s message indicates a clear political ceiling for Iranian acceptance of the memorandum. By tying Iranian compliance to US delivery, he placed the agreement within a narrower framework of reciprocal action, rather than a longer-term understanding insulated from shifting US policy choices.

If Washington does not meet its obligations as described by Ghalibaf, the immediate consequence envisioned by the Iranian speaker, at least as reported, would be that Tehran would treat the memorandum’s commitments as nonbinding. That posture could complicate implementation steps that require coordination between the two sides and could affect how Iranian institutions plan for the next stages of the arrangement.

For US officials, the remarks also underscore how public statements inside Iran’s government may shape the operating environment for negotiations. Any future steps tied to the memorandum would likely face scrutiny not only from Iran’s negotiating teams but also from parliament, where the speaker’s position carries weight in the domestic process.